Question for warriors

[General Maximus]

That is rude if the person does not respond. I would be frustrated and niffed to!

[Onimaster]

You can't write a rule to enforce good role playing.

We call parry, and resist... I do not want a call every time we turn a skill on or turn a skill off like def matrix, nor do I think we need to write in needing to twirl your swordlike a baton in a marching band while it's active.

I think the closest I'd want to come would be 'potato' = 'Please get in-character, you are dragging the scene down and ruining my fun' that we use in WH.

Yes Doug, people who ignore honest requests for info in a scene get the water boarding.

[Zydana]

I would like to point out that this resist/parry/whatever topic has been brought up already at least twice on the forums.

You can read it here-
http://www.finalhavenlarp.com/phpBB2/vi ... php?t=3612

And here
http://www.finalhavenlarp.com/phpBB2/vi ... c&start=45

Also I could of swore that there was another thread a long time ago where I could of swore a GM (at least I thought it was a GM) stated that while they are NPCing a bad guy and if you are hitting them with normal damage, for example, and the immune to normal damage, the PC should eventually get the idea since the baddie isn't dying and maybe start using another damage type. They went on further to say that they are not required to say that the particular monster is immune to common damage.

[GM_Chris]

I dont think you should have to twirl your weapon like a baton either. I think warriors should still attempt to activly block.

[Francesco DeLemuerte]

But what if my warrior has a telekinetic shield that blocks weapon strikes and that is how I roleplay my DM?

[GM_Chris]

This is why we need direction when we say "RP how you want" stipulation.

[Atrum Draconus]

It's bad form not to give PC's or NPC's some indication that you aren't hurting them at all. It's LARP and some things have to be conveyed with words or actions or else we'd all just run around hitting each other with weapons or packets and not saying anything at all. The attacker usually has no idea of what the persons soak is. I've seen no effect portrayed many different ways besides just saying it. Ting, laughter, "is that a fly?", some indicator. I don't think people need to say they are activating a skill any more than I think people need to say they are charging a skill.

But what if my warrior has a telekinetic shield that blocks weapon strikes and that is how I roleplay my DM? Yeah cause that wouldn't be obvious to the person attacking you.

[celegar]

You can't write a rule to enforce good role playing.

gonna have to agree with this.

and add the statement of "why do you care?"
an npc's job isnt to kill the players, its to entertain them. if they want to act like billy badass and just stand nonchelauntly while you pound on them as they take no damage, then let them, that is entertaining to them. the only real reason i can see as to why an npc would be frustrated with this is if they are actively trying to kill characters. which shouldnt happen.

[GM_Chris]

Its really more of a communication issue I guess I dont care if a person wants to lie on the ground or what ever they want to do as long as I understand what they are doig.

[dier_cire]

Yeah cause that wouldn't be obvious to the person attacking you.

I think he was refering more to Chris' "must actively block" post rather than the required acknowledgement concept.

[cole45]

I think Chris' theory is that if you are acticly blcking, we can see what you are doing.


I don;t think it matters WHAT communicaiton method we use as long as we do indeed use it.