Influence, Death and Kept Items

See, Ruy is an example of punishment that doesn't belong in a game - there's a difference between telling people to try it better next time, and saying "Hah! You died!".

Of course, death has matured in game in the respect that it's easier to save your items... even in the wilderness you get a grave. So why is the Angel of Mercy so preposterous? It's just a backwards grave... you have to find Mercy, rather than your grave. Patar suggested that the longer you take the more of a punishment you incur... it's entirely possible.

Back before Halberds were that widely known - although they still aren't that known (I still get asked what's up with my spear) - I once died trying to defeat a boss in a quest. I had more price-valuable stuff on me, so I lost my halberd... but it was my pride and joy lol. I worked so hard to complete Regicide so I could buy a Rune Halberd, and 100k was a lot of money for me back then, and now I had to find 100k again. Like I said... the new death system will only really effects the lower levelled players. If I died now I could easily just replace my weapon.

Isn't the angel of mercy the best grave?

Or was it death?

yeah and I've lost over a million in items about 10 times...and i that was mostly back when i ahd like 1.1mil

and only two of those were in pking situations

Also psycho...I happen to not like any of those ideas so I can't vote in the poll

Dark Avorian wrote:

3mptylord wrote:Okay, your opinion. Please, just leave it at that.

What is that supposed to mean...are you saying that because that's my opinion it shouldn't happen in game. Are you saying that it's my opinion but I shouldn't say what it is.

As in... your opinion has been established, end of that discussion. There is no point arguing over opinions. I can't see how you got either of those interpretations.

Dark Avorian wrote:

3mptylord wrote:Other players on this forum like the death idea, so you're the minority.

And so i should stay in my corner and behave? Most players would also like it if a quest gave a 13m experience lamp usable on any skill over 10. But I wouldn't support it because that would unbalance the game and make it too easy.

The point of a forum is constructive discussion - I know I don't always stay on task, but I've been working on that (I know it's hard not to retaliate to a post). Players who don't support rarely do or have anything constructive to offer - you've stated your non-support, that has been established, you have no use to this discussion if you are not going to be constructive. And how is your comparison anything alike? This new-system for PVE and non-Skull PVP death will not overpower the game or undermine the system - in effect, it's backwards of the current system. Players die, they spawn, and can choose to retrieve their stuff - the suggestion is that when a player dies, they spawn, and can choose to retrieve their stuff. The only difference is that you can obtain more items/items of your choice. As other players cannot receive your drops anymore, it makes no difference to anyone but the player in question how many of their items they get back.

Dark Avorian wrote:

3mptylord wrote: I know loads of players that, at the time, would temporarily quit after dying because they simply couldn't be bothered (of course, prices were much higher and it took slightly longer to buy replacements).

And I'm supposed to pity these people because they can't handle a basic principle taught to every runescape player?

Before the trade restriction, higher levels would pity them. I used to give out free armour in Lumbridge. Since we cannot anymore, the game should pity them in the place of good-willed players. Also, I don't recall being taught about death - I think I was only told about it from friends.

Dark Avorian wrote:

3mptylord wrote: In a game punishment should be fair.

I think the system we have is fair. You should lose items if you die. you have to lose something and I don't think that some combat damage on your armour is enough.

That's your opinion. I'm sorry, but I think that making your armour near-useless is just as good as making it non existent... the only difference is, near-useless armour demands Smithing, whilst non-existent armour requires going GE and buying it from player who most likely killed for it.

Dark Avorian wrote:

3mptylord wrote:Why do you think the character is named the Angel of MERCY... she pities those who died, she doesn't make it lossless, but she doesn't act coldly as with Death.

Yep and so does guthix/saradomin/merlin (lumb/fally/camelot)...he let's us keep all of our hard earned experience and three of our most "valuable" items. Trust me psycho..you don't wan't to play in a game that punishes by taking away experience

Oh, I don't know... the few I've played seemed to do it pretty fairly. It was actually a fairer punishment because at least you kept the equipment to earn it back.

Dark Avorian wrote:

3mptylord wrote:See, Ruy is an example of punishment that doesn't belong in a game - there's a difference between telling people to try it better next time, and saying "Hah! You died!".

And which is more effective at keeping a toddler away from a stove? telling them that it could burn their hand or the one time that they sneak in and touch it and it burns them? I'm not saying Hah, I'm saying that you deserved it...last tiem I checked jagex has always had warning screens anywhere that could get you skulled explaining the concept.

Better analogy - what's better for teaching a child, letting them burn themselves or throwing them in the over and cooking them for half an hour?

Dark Avorian wrote:

3mptylord wrote:Of course, death has matured in game in the respect that it's easier to save your items... even in the wilderness you get a grave.

You seem to be assuming that I like graves...sure I've benefited from them but I don't like them and I always try the demolish option on other peoples graves even when I know it won't work

I'm sorry to hear that, I truly am.

the thing about using the demolish option was a joke

and I love the way you didn't respond to my arguments based on high levels which are my real problem with this idea

Really doesn't read like one.

Now all the sarcasm and bad grammar has gotten me confused...

Seriously, the only people that would want a quest that gives huge exp lamps are the new and selfish players.

again I love th way that neither of you responded to my last argument

Except it won't...It's the high levels who are more likely to have
100's of thousands of gp worth of non-combat related drops. and they
are the people who should know better.

I fail to see the argument there, I felt no need to respond to it. High levels take what they know they can afford to replace - they know better. It's only lower levels who can't afford to die, but can't afford to buy equipment to take that they don't care about. I'm not afraid to take anything because I know I can afford to replace it - I did not think like that when all my money was in one or two items.