The bit about "godlike mode" seems to unfairly rule out a roleplay about beating a monster by guile rather than force of arms. Either way, it's ridiculous to roleplay killing a monster that isn't dead. --John 14 September 2005 15:03 (CEST)
It is is posible to kill a monster on you own, but not if someone from the island just attacked the same monster with 100 man or so and was not victories. It is just an example. --darkmawl 17 September 2005 22:13 (CEST)
- Playing DAoC Tom? I will chop those up a bit and see what we can use... I need some guidance on how strict you want the naming policies to be... Last I played DOaC the RP servers were rather harsh on names. --Eric S P 19 September 2005 19:39 (CEST)
- I think those rules, BM-ified would work near perfectly for Battlemaster :) -- Revan
My understanding is that there are no "RP police", and the chances of Tom stepping in to invalidate a roleplay are about .001%. Should we remove the "Only a GM can invalidate a RP" section? It's kind of misleading, as it implies that you can actually take a grievance to someone and have it answered with anything besides, "We're not the RP police." I think it's also basically from the SM manual, and RP played a role orders of magnitude greater in SM than it does in BM. (I know of nearly no instances of RP bringing about a manual change to accommodate it in BM: the game mechanics trump it 99.999% of the time). --Anaris 14:57, 30 November 2006 (CET)
RP section edit
"However you could roleplay that your character was nearby on a balcony and heard him, befoer hurrying off to tell the judge."
- Not if he is he thinking something, no, you can't. -Chénier 20:12, 18 June 2007 (CEST)
" What you can't see you don't know. If someone roleplayed that he did something, but your character did not see it, or otherwise hear of it. He can not accuse someone of that. For example. If an Infiltrator manage to "harm" someone and was not caught or seen, but roleplayed it only, then no character will know who did it. Sometimes this could make roleplaying hard, as your character trusts someone you (as the player) know can not be trusted"
This doesn't synch with what Tom has said several times - if it was RP'd, and you got the RP, your char knows it. Same with the above example. Don't want people to know, don't RP to them. I don't know whose page this is, so won't fix myself. --Jmadsen 23:22, 15 May 2008 (CEST)
- Actually no, that is the difference between IC and OOC knowledge. The player can RP a successful assault and unless they deliberately RP with someone about them noticing who it was your character DOES NOT KNOW who committed the assault. As a player you do because you can see the RP, however like most RP's unless you are invited and/or able to RP yourself into the situation you are not there, nor do you know of what occured outside of what the game or players indicate you may know. IC and OOC can get VERY difficult to differentiate in RP's. An RP doesn't mean your character knows, it merely is there to add to the world for you as a player. Phellan 07:28, 16 May 2008 (CEST)
- Actually, no - you will notice that Tom has already removed that paragraph. The rule is, if your char got the Green Tag, he knows. Not realistic, but the only way to avoid endless fights. Now, it IS considered bad form to "know" about those things, but the game rule is, you know it. --Jmadsen 09:53, 16 May 2008 (CEST)
- Then it's better off not regulated, if you ask me. It doesn't make any sense to enforce bad RP. -Chénier 13:21, 16 May 2008 (CEST)
- That's the point - it's NOT regulated. You say it - they know it. Nothing to discuss. --Jmadsen 13:38, 16 May 2008 (CEST)
Keep characters seperate
I thought it was on this page, maybe I read it elsewhere. Anyhow, it should be here. -Chénier 21:41, 14 October 2007 (CEST)