Actually, the whole point of the posited example was that the melee PC knowingly entered a blast area. If that had not been the case, then the blaster PC is more wrong because he is not looking for other options or trying to work out a strategy for both PCs (even during a fight this is possible, and I try this all the time if I cannot target anything because of allies).
And it really takes a lot of bad coincidences for targeting an ally to make the most sense, at least for me. Really, think about it. 1) there has to be an ally surrounded by more than 2 enemies, 2) there have to be party members down, 3) the ally has to be able to take the damage better than the foes, 4) some healer has to still be up who can heal the ally right away.
I try really hard to play for the team. And apparently you think that my definition of "real prick" is someone who inconveniences me. That is not true at all. A real prick is someone who ruins my game experience repeatedly, especially after a discussion of the issue has occurred. And not healing one person during a fight who is ruining my game experience after being talked to is not the same at all as not playing for the team. It's called "consequences." There are plenty of other players who are contributing to the group fun that I'd rather help. It's about having fun.
And even the ally that got targeted would think the game is fun if everyone lived through a tough fight.
Robert W
From: rangercoric <jboerj@...> To: LivingFR@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 6, 2009 10:30:27 AM Subject: [LivingFR] Re: What's wrong with the RPGA?
--- In LivingFR@yahoogroup s.com, Robert Wiese <robwiese8@. ..> wrote: > > That's easy. The melee PC's player is more wrong, because he is ruining the other player's fun AND KNOWS IT. By making the other PC ineffective, he is denying the blaster PC's player a chance to contribute and feel good about the game. The melee PC's player is more selfish. >
In all of the hypotheticals, everyone is assuming that the melee PC is deliberately choosing to be there. This is not always true nor in the original example was that the posited case. All that was asked was what happens if a player targets another player without permission. This might have resulted from a melee player going in without "permission from the blasters in the party ...
... AND IS UNIMPORTANT. There is no rule that says
that PCs have to get permission to do a thing in an LFR game. ONLY that they get permission IF they are going to hurt another PC. So the only person who is wrong is the Blaster/Wizard/ Sorceror/ FIGHTER that tries to damage his fellow PCs without getting permission TO DO SO.
> In my group, I target friends no matter what, if it makes the most sense, because I can heal allies. But if someone is a real prick, then I tend to let them fend for themselves in combat and don't heal them if they need it. >
So you'll only be a team player if the team is being good to you? And you'll take it out on the team if they aren't?
And that is why I can safely say I hope I don't play with you. If you decide that you want to be 5 years old and throw a tantrum because someone took your toys away, feel free. But you don't have to do it near me.
joe
PS - Can an admin please close this thread, it is clear
that it is just going nowhere.
... In all of the hypotheticals, everyone is assuming that the melee PC is deliberately choosing to be there. This is not always true nor in the original...
Actually, the whole point of the posited example was that the melee PC knowingly entered a blast area. If that had not been the case, then the blaster PC is...
... Yep, we call this "paying the stupid tax." After allowing selfish players do whatever they want and nearly getting my PC (plus those of my party) killed...
... The player you're describing and the player whose comment I previously responded to do not seem to bear a lot of similarity ( to me). To be fair, in...
... Joe, you are missing the point. This is not about being a dick (if you are going to say it, say it. Substituting an "*" doesn't make it better). I can't...
well said Bryan...there is only so far you can go to help people. ... From: Bryan Blumklotz To: LivingFR@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 10:34 PM ...
Just my two cents.... Â (This also goes for the other thread as well, the one about "asking for permission.") Â While you're waiting to file your "stupid...
... Yes, but you didn't need to, and probably shouldn't have. The original question (where I stepped in, anyway) brought to light an interesting discussion...
Robert, You said this way better than I could. And yes, I didn't just abandon the Pal4/Monk1 to his fate in my example. I talked with him for 3 rounds of...
... Such tricks by spammers to avoid filters are aggravating. Using the same tricks on this list should be seen as just another attempt to slip things past...
... If you weren't a noob, you would recognize that Robert was previously the head of the RPGA at a time when the RPGA was a much more enjoyable organization...
Amen to everything but the noob comment that Ed just posted. Troy The Moderator Post trimmed out of repect to digest readers. Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile...
... By default - both are being jerks. It's a TEAM GAME - it states as much in several places, so any character who prioritizes their enjoyment above and at...
Dan, The argument you present is essentially like two drivers on the Freeway...one is going the speed limit and is in the number one lane, the other wants to...
You can try to argue this until you are blue in the face. If you think you can blast willy nilly "because the CCG doesn't say you have to have permission" you...
Sorry to be nitpicky, but if the second car is behind him, he technically can't be speeding. Wanting to go faster isn't Illegal. Though, in Oz not keeping...
Neither is. They are both just wrong. There is no shades of wrong. One is wrong because they're being a jerk. The other is wrong because they're being a...
Normally I'd cut this message a bit, but it deserves the thread for line of thinking. A blaster has range, and an ability to law out devestating damage while...
In most MMO games player characters are completely immune to damage caused by other players including blasts and area attacks. It doesn't make sense but it...
I think people are missing the real problem here: What happens if the *DM* doesn't give you permission to attack his characters? :) On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 9:08...
... "If you are in control of your character and have an attack that includes PCs in its effect, always ask the players controlling the affected characters if...
The rule would make no sense at all if you had to ask permission, but did not have to get the permission...where did you learn how to read? -Gortex Begin...
Last week I had my first run in with this rule as a DM, a character was dominated and other characters thought they could easily drop that character to 0 hit...
... It's always been my understanding/interpretation that once you're dominated you are effectively an NPC - if I were DMing that table, I'd rule the players...
This is what they're talking about when they say "Have fun and don't be a jerk." Evan ... From: ringweld@... To: LivingFR@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday,...
Having problems with message search?
Offline 
Send Email
