[Discuss] Death (This is serious proposal to the game)

[Loren Schmidt]

On Jan 8, 2008 7:18 AM, Shane O'neil <evil_hamster__ at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Ok, well here is my idea. I'm looking for people who feel the same way
> about the whole concept of characters dying in battlemaster. I hear everyone
> talking about how rulers never step down from there positions. There is
> never a clean cut. The lords are always the same. Then Tom says "well find
> ways to remove them". Well guess which amazing part of life a lot is used to
> "remove" people. Yes, you guessed it. Death. Personally I am looking for
> people who feel death would add to the game and personally wouldn't start
> crying if their characters were assassinated in a political conspiracy. I,
> myself, wouldn't mind that, and no, I don't think it would scare away
> players. Look at Tribal Wars. www.tribalwars.com. That game is based on
> killing other players. You can be destroyed even if you one of the most
> powerful players in the game. That game has loads of players. It is the
> aspect of death that makes players join and get addicted. The realistic
> conditions that you aren't invulnerable..
>

If you like it so much why don't you play it?  I understand that you're
trying to provide a useful comment on this issue, but it has been discussed
ad nauseum and has been rejected each and every time, end of discussion.
It's not a habit as you later suggested, it's a feature of the game.  You
have to consciously choose to allow your character to be put into situations
where he can die.  (Rebel, hero, infiltraitor, defy authority and receive a
ban and so forth).  What you're suggesting takes that out of the game
entirely, and instead makes this more about who can last the longest as the
King of the hill before they get taken out.  Which if you ask me is total
hogwash.

But, I do have a counter-solution.  Soft-term limits.  Based on the type of
government someone elected to a position has an increasing chance of being
kicked out of office.  Each form of government can have a different limit,
for the positions which are constantly being elected it's a moot point, but
those which are not.  Well, there is our solution to turnover.  Will it stop
someone who is popular from continuing in office, not likely unless someone
is clever enough to have them seriously wounded during the election and thus
ineligible.  But obviously it would be possible then.

Secondary to this, I'd simply eliminate the ability to step down once and
for all from all government positions.  If they want to be out of office
tough, get protested out.

/Loren
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://news.battlemaster.org/pipermail/discuss-moderated/attachments/20080108/ede7e2cf/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------


-- 
Unsubscribing and other list options:
http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss