Less than real life, but far more than a game.

[Black Canyon]

I just wish their was a defense against the stab-drag-vehicle-murder beyond retribution-when-discovered. town guards should be able to be town guards and intercede that way they stab some one, then a guard steps up to prevent the dragging. anything that makes abductions a little tougher.

I'd be interested to see stats for deaths. Non starvation non suicide deaths if they are 1. in buildings 2. in vehicles 3. on the road. or 4. in town.

I bet the vast majority are in buildings and vehicles (behind locks) with crazy newbies filling in the 'on the road' kills

There is, actually. It's just that we'd prefer not to take those measures. For instance, working inside buildings when possible, locked buildings even better. Keeping harbors locked prevents larger numbers of attackers at any one time and also puts a damper on dragging to ships since smaller boats are needed to dock on shores. Also, of course.... have guards who are more active.... the more the better.

[Uma]

I think folks do work inside when they can, but a lot of jobs can't be done inside.

a player guard would have to have the browser open and jump to action to prevent the drag that happens after the stab, I'm not sure they could even do it in time to stop the completion of the stab-drag.

It's just kind of double-standardy that some one can sleep while mining coal, running a harvester, forging a sword. (or drive a car while knitting, cooking or carving), but yet a guard can't just 'be on guard duty' like a project, and in that time the guard will intercede in guard-ey issues some how.

[SekoETC]

The location at the time of death isn't recorded, only the current location of a body, which tends to be outside since it's the only place where you can bury (besides the sea).

[Black Canyon]

I think folks do work inside when they can, but a lot of jobs can't be done inside.

a player guard would have to have the browser open and jump to action to prevent the drag that happens after the stab, I'm not sure they could even do it in time to stop the completion of the stab-drag.

It's just kind of double-standardy that some one can sleep while mining coal, running a harvester, forging a sword. (or drive a car while knitting, cooking or carving), but yet a guard can't just 'be on guard duty' like a project, and in that time the guard will intercede in guard-ey issues some how.

I agree that taking defensive measures does not eliminate risk. And some jobs are more risky than others. Working outdoors where animals can attack and bad guys can sneak in and kidnap or murder you is definitely more risky than working inside cooking over an oven or smelting steel. But, do we really want a game where all risk is eliminated? I don't.

[Marian]

There's risk and then there's a 'conflict' that only takes an instant to resolve, with the attacker guaranteed to always be awake during this instant and the victim in a senseless coma unless they're extremely lucky, no matter how active their player is otherwise. You can be sitting right there at your computer logged in to Cantr and still lose the fight before you even get the chance to read what happened and click a button. Once you're behind a locked door, that's it, game over, don't even expect the courtesy of RP as they kill you.

If some one came into your house in real life in the middle of the night, stabbed you and tried to drag you off, even in a situation that awful you'd still have more of a chance than a Cantr character, because at least you're guaranteed to wake up when it happens and have a chance to fight back.

Though the addition of windows at least makes working inside a possibility now, it wasn't really a realistic option before.

[LittleSoul]

The great thing about Cantr is that you can have both; your character can have a life of rainbows and flowers if you want that kind of play, where conflict rarely occurs, but usually at a compromise of some freedoms, or you can have exciting, fun, dramatic, stressful conflict at the cost and risk of losing your character or seeing them/other people get hurt.

The not so great thing about Cantr is that you don't really have a choice in the matter, though...you can be living your stress-free life of rainbows and flowers or doing your part to build up your community when suddenly you're locked up and slaughtered with no way to fight back, often with no other reason than someone getting bored with their character's life and decided to end yours.

I'd just say that you can't assume to know a character's motives, much less the player's. As for no way out, perhaps towns should start giving crowbars to their devoted and trusted citizens so that at least someone will have a way out? It just depends on how much they value security and what they are willing to do to get those crowbars if they are not easy to come by. I'd also suggest weapons in the same way. You're complaining for a valid reason, but that doesn't mean there aren't things you can do to stop or mediate the damage of such events.

There's an astonishingly high percentage of characters in this game that are either born sociopaths, or at least ready to lose their minds and go on a killing spree at the drop of a hat. Everything I read in the OP, I understand and empathize with completely because I've felt the same way numerous times and just in general get too involved with my characters. When I'm RPing a character, I'm not just RPing, I'm completely in their head and feeling everything they feel. And I don't like to generalize, but a lot of times I think the people playing the pirates and killers just don't see it that way themselves at all. I had a character that was made into a slave once, and a player contacted me on the forum to tell me all about how they were going to rape them soon...most of their characters I was aware of were psychotic in some way and this was all a big joke to them, while meanwhile the stress of the situation even before the idea of rape came into the picture had me literally shaking in real life.

Again, I'd say you are way too emotionally involved in the game if the events are literally making you shake. I get into my character's heads too, I roleplay them and feel what they feel, see what they see, because that's how I know how to best write a reaction for them that would be in character. But when something bad happens, I don't let it hurt -me-, I don't let it affect -me-. Separation between player and character is hard but it isn't impossible, and having the ability to do it makes it a more fun game for not just others but -you-; a game shouldn't be stressful, it defeats the purpose, and it's not cantr's fault. On the rape thing I will add that for one, they shouldn't be telling you future actions at all, two, if you were not comfortable with your character being a slave or being raped then PD should have been contacted.

Cantr is amazing and addictive like nothing else, but it can be flat out exhausting and emotionally draining to play sometimes. Even when it's not a life or death situation...my character can be all knotted up inside from rejection or just dealing with day to day stress (there always seems to be those characters that exist for no other reason than to tear relationships apart and prevent progress and cause constant drama...) and suddenly it becomes really difficult to get home from a not-so-great-day at work and then shoulder their problems too.

That's the point, it doesn't -have- to be that way, it gets that way because you don't know how to recognize and mentally keep separate the emotions of your character (how they would react), and your own feelings on the situation. Sometimes they might be exactly the same, but they shouldn't be all the time. If they are I would suggest making characters that don't have a personality so close to your own so you can differentiate between whose emotions are whose more easily.
Cantr shouldn't be affecting your mood after you put the game down. I empathize, but I also disagree with you on a lot of points, and I think the end result is that you should either take a break, re-evaluate whether this is the kind of game you can actually enjoy playing - with all the good and the bad about it, or learn how to separate and differentiate character emotions and your emotions.

[ManyVoices]

If all the players quit that were in some way affected by there character, I think you'd lose most of the player base.

[Marian]

^^Exactly. Despite all the frustrating BS in this game I've been playing it on and off for eight years...that would have been more like 2 weeks if there was no emotional element. I guess LittleSoul only plays for the sweet graphics and fast-paced action though.

Seriously, I don't see what's so hard to get about people getting involved with their characters. You've never experienced a book or a movie that put a big stupid grin on your face for hours afterward or made you cry because you just got hit with the emotional equivalent of a mack truck? And Cantr doesn't even give you the kind of distance those do, you're not observing someone else's character but right there inside the head of one you created yourself.

Freeform roleplay is I guess the closest contender but even then it's not even close. The players usually work out a loose idea of how an encounter's going to go and if someone does gets killed there's at least a sense of closure and dramatic appropriateness. (and the fight scenes are way cooler and more extensive...) But there's almost always a creative way out of a situation with no fear of getting smacked in the face with unbendable game mechanics, so the tension's just not there.

It's the freedom of Cantr set against the backdrop of a structured and persistent world that makes that magic combination I think, and I've yet to come across another game that's managed it.

[Majix]

It's interesting to read how the ones saying "it's only a game" are so sure that their opinion is the the only right opinion.
If you are emotionally affected you should stop playing.

That means I will have to stop reading books. They affect me emotionally.

[Black Canyon]

Let's be clear. It is a game. That's not to say we won't be emotionally involved with our characters, much like we become emotionally involved with the characters in a story. Different in that this story often lasts for years rather than the amount of time it takes to read a book. So yes, emotions can run deep. I don't think anyone is arguing that it is an all or nothing sort of thing. But if you are becoming so emotionally enmeshed with your character that it is resulting in ongoing issues for you such as sleep loss, depression etc, then yes, you should probably detach yourself from your characters.

Because it is a game.

[saztronic]

I cry at movies. Actually, they are the only place I do cry, most of the time, and somewhat perplexingly (I mean, the worst movie can make me tear up sometimes, it's ridiculous, but I digress).

I've been angry at moviemakers too, for what they did to me... I remember seeing Dancer in the Dark by Lars von Trier, and good as that movie was, I had to turn it off before the end because it was just so dark... and I've never gone back and watched the end. Along with another movie of his that I've seen, Breaking the Waves, it's made me wonder just what is wrong with that guy.

But I don't really give a shit. I just don't go see Lars von Trier movies anymore. I was emotionally invested in the films of his that I saw, while I was seeing them, and in their characters. They had an impact on me. I still remember it, and think about it sometimes. But other than that it has no effect on my life. I don't get depressed about it. I don't sit around wondering what Lars von Trier's motives are, or why he keeps making films that reputedly have the same effect on people to this day. I don't write him letters, I don't write letters to film forums, bewailing his film making techniques and questioning his motives. I don't quit going to movies, just because there are moviemakers out there who make films like his.

I was emotionally invested in the films, when I watched them. Doing all these other things would mean that I had been emotionally imprisoned by them. There's a big difference.

I think what some of us are saying, or what I'm saying anyway, is that if you can't see the difference, or can't maintain the distinction in your life, then Cantr may very well be a bad thing for you. I understand that stories have real power, and that's amazing, it's part of what makes Cantr so engaging, but you also have power, or should have. You have the power to determine how far you will let a story shape your being. If you don't have that power, then you are in grave danger of being manipulated beyond your ability to control -- by this game, by art, by other people, even by your own unfettered imagination.

So Cantr is just a game, because that's all I let it be. Doesn't mean I'm not emotionally invested in it, quite the contrary, but I'm not emotionally imprisoned by it... and if I felt I was, I'd quit.

[LittleSoul]

^^Exactly. Despite all the frustrating BS in this game I've been playing it on and off for eight years...that would have been more like 2 weeks if there was no emotional element. I guess LittleSoul only plays for the sweet graphics and fast-paced action though.

Seriously, I don't see what's so hard to get about people getting involved with their characters. You've never experienced a book or a movie that put a big stupid grin on your face for hours afterward or made you cry because you just got hit with the emotional equivalent of a mack truck? And Cantr doesn't even give you the kind of distance those do, you're not observing someone else's character but right there inside the head of one you created yourself.

I never said I didn't have an emotional stake within my characters - I actually said the opposite, just to be clear, since I don't really get the joke.

I get into my character's heads too, I roleplay them and feel what they feel, see what they see, because that's how I know how to best write a reaction for them that would be in character. But when something bad happens, I don't let it hurt -me-, I don't let it affect -me-.

My point was that yes, you can be emotionally involved, but you don't take that negative events that happen to your character so personally that you get physically ill or shaken. That's just too far, and as much as -you- don't want to play with characters who cause those events, I am willing to bet the people behind the characters who create them don't want to play with someone who would take it that personally either.

Regardless, all I am trying to say is that there is a balance that should be maintained here by the player themselves. Cantr can't make sure you're not getting personally offended or affected by things that happen in the game, so it's up to the player to be able to handle these events maturely.

Cantr will lose an even bigger part of the player base if the game is completely boring because conflict never occurs; let's not forget a game trying to be a simulator and/or RPG without conflict is just plain unrealistic.
I think things like rape could be done without, but combat needs to stay.

Basically, I agree with this.

So Cantr is just a game, because that's all I let it be. Doesn't mean I'm not emotionally invested in it, quite the contrary, but I'm not emotionally imprisoned by it... and if I felt I was, I'd quit.

And this.

So yes, emotions can run deep. I don't think anyone is arguing that it is an all or nothing sort of thing. But if you are becoming so emotionally enmeshed with your character that it is resulting in ongoing issues for you such as sleep loss, depression etc, then yes, you should probably detach yourself from your characters.

Because it is a game.

[Marian]

Regardless, all I am trying to say is that there is a balance that should be maintained here by the player themselves. Cantr can't make sure you're not getting personally offended or affected by things that happen in the game, so it's up to the player to be able to handle these events maturely.

And again, the reason I (and I imagine others) play the game is because it's emotionally involving. Yes that can be a negative thing just as easily as a positive one, but I'm not asking for Cantr to make sure of anything and I really have no need for people telling me what 'level' of emotion is okay and which is not okay.

Cantr will lose an even bigger part of the player base if the game is completely boring because conflict never occurs; let's not forget a game trying to be a simulator and/or RPG without conflict is just plain unrealistic.

And here I think you're just arguing against a point that no one's actually trying to make. No one has said anything about removing conflict. Now I might go so far as to say that it's an objective fact that the way conflict usually plays out is bullshit and has always been bullshit and directly opposed to excitement and fun, but the character in charge of the Great and Powerful Lock does have a little leeway to work around the combat mechanics there if they want to, especially now that we have the NDS state. People get upset not just because they lost a character to unfair circumstances, but because of the callousness and disregard of the other player...if you're dead set on killing a character, have a little respect for the fact that they're not a freaking NPC there to die for your brief amusement, another player has taken months or years to develop them and deserves a little time and attention and a chance to play out their last scene. They should not have to just wake up in the morning to an out-of-the-blue death announcement and one less character on their list. Other than the NDS, nothing in the game mechanics encourage this, but they shouldn't have to...all it takes is not being a self-centered ass.

[LittleSoul]

Regardless, all I am trying to say is that there is a balance that should be maintained here by the player themselves. Cantr can't make sure you're not getting personally offended or affected by things that happen in the game, so it's up to the player to be able to handle these events maturely.

And again, the reason I (and I imagine others) play the game is because it's emotionally involving. Yes that can be a negative thing just as easily as a positive one, but I'm not asking for Cantr to make sure of anything and I really have no need for people telling me what 'level' of emotion is okay and which is not okay.

Yes, I agree with that. As for the emotional aspect, I'm not just talking to you, I'm talking to all the players. There -is- a defining limit that shouldn't be passed when it comes to being emotionally involved with your character, which is where you start to physically and mentally break down, become ill, and have adverse reactions -outside- the game because of events that happen within it. These are real signs of stress and anxiety. What you need is not my concern, I'm talking about what cantr -doesn't- need, and what players -don't- need; which is ridiculous amounts of preventable stress from a game that is supposed to be fun, and is - for people who can keep their emotions in check outside the game in the face of dramatic in-game events.

Cantr will lose an even bigger part of the player base if the game is completely boring because conflict never occurs; let's not forget a game trying to be a simulator and/or RPG without conflict is just plain unrealistic.

And here I think you're just arguing against a point that no one's actually trying to make. No one has said anything about removing conflict. Now I might go so far as to say that it's an objective fact that the way conflict usually plays out is bullshit and has always been bullshit and directly opposed to excitement and fun, but the character in charge of the Great and Powerful Lock does have a little leeway to work around the combat mechanics there if they want to, especially now that we have the NDS state. People get upset not just because they lost a character to unfair circumstances, but because of the callousness and disregard of the other player...if you're dead set on killing a character, have a little respect for the fact that they're not a freaking NPC there to die for your brief amusement, another player has taken months or years to develop them and deserves a little time and attention and a chance to play out their last scene. They should not have to just wake up in the morning to an out-of-the-blue death announcement and one less character on their list. Other than the NDS, nothing in the game mechanics encourage this, but they shouldn't have to...all it takes is not being a self-centered ass.

That's because the point wasn't being made to you at all, it was in regard to ManyVoices here:

If all the players quit that were in some way affected by there character, I think you'd lose most of the player base.

I was making a counter argument using the opposite side of his point, to say that neither extreme is the ideal situation. It wasn't directed to you personally.
I agree with the rest of your points on that paragraph in that the combat system needs to be redone.

[saztronic]

People get upset not just because they lost a character to unfair circumstances, but because of the callousness and disregard of the other player...if you're dead set on killing a character, have a little respect for the fact that they're not a freaking NPC there to die for your brief amusement, another player has taken months or years to develop them and deserves a little time and attention and a chance to play out their last scene. They should not have to just wake up in the morning to an out-of-the-blue death announcement and one less character on their list. Other than the NDS, nothing in the game mechanics encourage this, but they shouldn't have to...all it takes is not being a self-centered ass.

I agree this happens more often than it needs to. Ideally, every death would be RP'd to a degree of satisfaction for the player of the victim.

But I also think there are times when it's a bit of a case of the game mechanics being in conflict with the demands of roleplaying.

Let's say that I'm determined to take out a town's leader, get his/her keys, and rob the place blind. I've spent the time to arm myself, get a van, plan the attack, and recruit 2-3 other characters/players who I know will be awake at the critical moment. The bandit team succeeds in dragging the leader into a van, and everybody attacks the leader, who's 110 years old, mortally wounding this person, before he/she has a chance to wake up. The bandits get the keys, and off they go pillaging, or taking over the town, or whatever.

Now... do I want to leave the town leader alive in NDS on the van, so that he/she can RP a more satisfying death? Not if I'm sticking around in the town for any length of time whatsoever. I don't want the "nearly dead" leader to be giving instructions from the van to other townspeople about 1) how and where to call or send for help, 2) secret passwords or information that will confirm their identity to others, 3) how to organize a defense, 4) where key items are located and how to move them to more safe locations... etc. If I myself am truly roleplaying the bandit or marauder with any degree of authenticity, I do not care about the town leader. The only reason I would have for caring about the town leader would be an OOC reason, i.e., that OOC I know this person is not an NPC but a character that someone has taken time to nurture and grow and means something to a real person somewhere. The text that I've highlighted in red above can ONLY be known OOC, and not really played in character by the bandit except by contrivance.

So do I act on the OOC knowledge (which I'm not supposed to do) and keep the town leader alive for a few days of death-bed roleplaying, or do I act in the true spirit of the character I've chosen to play (which I gather from the perspective of many, is the ultimate, sacred goal of the game) and kill the leader immediately?

Anyway, I've never been on either side of this scenario I don't think, but I'm curious about others' thoughts on the hypothetical.