UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

Skcarkden wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Immortal guards are needed. Without them - there would be no downside to being a murderer and no incentive to stay out of trouble or sneak around. Players could simply walk around stealing and looting what ever they like and killing everyone who got in their way.

I would like to see them change it to where you can open doors during combat though. Very annoying when you have an NPC beating on you while you are trying to exit a house. Almost forces you to have to kill them.

Not really... as they are right now, they're too powerful. Immortal and very strong hits and long range pulls. Then if you do manage to run from a bounty successfuly it takes forever to wear out.

They may as well make the game if you commit a crime you die instantly to save us the time.

A bounty acquired by stealing takes 12 minutes tops to get rid of without investing in Swiftly Forgotten. Assault and Murder bounties take longer but Dark Brotherhood line has something to decrease what you get from that too. To top that all off Counterfeit Pardon Edicts are very easy to get and burn off 500 gold from the bounty per Edict. Of course anyone without the DLCs doesn't have these luxuries but still it's not so bad. Do the crime, do the "time", one way or another, but only if you get caught

So basically you have to pay to have a game feature less annoying? I think i'd rather gain a 50k bounty and see if you can wait it out the whole 2months worth of time offline than give money for that.

I don't care if you find it a non-issue, i still don't think much of it with how excessive it is. Get guards after you? Oh, it turns out ZoS killed lore by making all guards like Scorpio where if you run you get pulled back to them so they can easykill ya and they are immortal to boot.

Really, i don't mind the bounty timer itself, because i do agree that a justice system should exist, i just would rather something more inspired than a simple "oh yeah let's just make them immortal, and have magical powers to pull you if you run, game of the year material right there!"

Even if they were killable but still very capable in a one on one would be good enough, and it gets more severe the more of a criminal you are. Some more serious consequences instead of being a simple 'kill on sight' target

Anything other than immortal guards with super strenght and a long wait time.

Skcarkden wrote: »

I don't care if you find it a non-issue, i still don't think much of it with how excessive it is. Get guards after you? Oh, it turns out ZoS killed lore by making all guards like Scorpio where if you run you get pulled back to them so they can easykill ya and they are immortal to boot.

As a TES lore nerd?

Uh... no.

In games, there is always a certain division between lore and gameplay, because it makes for a better game. For example, is it really realistic, lore-wise, for you to rack up a 5k bounty going on a killing spree at the Vukhel Guard docks, only to have that bounty disappear after a few days? Nope. A murder spree like that should get you on the naughty list for life, no matter how corrupt the watch is... but that wouldn't make for a fun game. Thus, your bounty degrades over time.

So, nope. No using defense-of-lore as a reason to complain about a mechanic you dislike.

rotaugen454 wrote: »

The last time I got killed by a guard was.....never.

i got killed by guards 17 times yesterday. trying to get the fleeing achievement.

most effective way to get away is a javelin, then jump in water, or to a lower town level.

I was listening to a guildmate explain to her young son why he just want to jail in Skyrim, and it made me wonder why we don't have jail in ESO. While I did try to avoid being locked up in Skyrim, I did enjoy the efforts of escaping. I don't know if it would be feasible to add in now, given the current framework, although I am hopeful they have at least looked into the possibility.

As for the guards... They need to stay unkillable.
If they were super strong bosses, how many guilds would run events to take them out, for fun?
In the Phantom Guilt quest, how many people actually took to heart the suggestion to kill the whole town?

Sometimes realism needs to be abandoned for gameplay, especially for a multi-player game.

It is too easy to avoid the guards all together, either from not being seen in the first place, to getting away from them if you do get caught. There are too many ways to reduce or eliminate your bounty for guards to be an issue.

Abeille wrote: »

BlackSparrow wrote: »

Skcarkden wrote: »

I don't care if you find it a non-issue, i still don't think much of it with how excessive it is. Get guards after you? Oh, it turns out ZoS killed lore by making all guards like Scorpio where if you run you get pulled back to them so they can easykill ya and they are immortal to boot.

As a TES lore nerd?

Uh... no.

In games, there is always a certain division between lore and gameplay, because it makes for a better game. For example, is it really realistic, lore-wise, for you to rack up a 5k bounty going on a killing spree at the Vukhel Guard docks, only to have that bounty disappear after a few days? Nope. A murder spree like that should get you on the naughty list for life, no matter how corrupt the watch is... but that wouldn't make for a fun game. Thus, your bounty degrades over time.

So, nope. No using defense-of-lore as a reason to complain about a mechanic you dislike.

People love to pull the "lore-breaking" claim for everything, and they hardly ever are using it right. More often than not, what they are complaining about is either a purely gameplay issue or is not lore-breaking at all and they just don't know enough about the lore to know that (like people who claim that the Any Race, Any Alliance perk is lore-breaking).

And people love to claim someone is pulling the lore breaking claim, like you two.

I guess sarcasm is beyond the comprehension of some people... Ironic that you're both condescending toward me when it should be toward each other. "Oh he mentioned lore, time to ignore the actual point and act all smart"

Yeah, i mentioned lore, and compared guards to Scorpio from mortal kombat, not as a point that it should be removed for lore reasons, but to mock the lazy justice system with it's guards and their lazy "Hey, you're other, and i'm here, imma pull you over here as a cheap shot" routine.

All you've done is effectively proven you're the kind of person to read someone typing on their phone: "help im trapped under a heavy bookshelf and cant get out" and all you can do is focus on the error and correct it to "i'm" and ignore the actual purpose of what was said.

Like i said, don't you think if i actually cared about using lore as a reason to change things that the guard immortality would be argued based on lore reasons as well? Or was the Scorpio reference really just to clever for 2 people acting smart?

Having that, and partially unrelated, they should bring dragons into the game

Might as well remove them and give op infinite gold.

Skcarkden wrote: »

Now you're just lying.I made a reference to scorpio ONCE as a mocking of the guards abilities, but never did i say anything remotely that it needed changing because it broke lore, If you were to finish reading before you stopped at that line, you'd have seen right after that my point was still about the pull itself being completely ridiculous, not because of lore, but because i find immortal NPC's with long range pulls just lazy and annoying.

You mentioned it again in subsequent posts, mostly to defend the original, but also to mock us for not "getting the reference." That's all that "keep mentioning" thing was meant as.

I apologize if I misread something that was supposed to be an off-hand joke. I keep rereading the applicable paragraph and, honestly, I'm having a hard time figuring out where, exactly, the sarcasm applies. There's probably a disconnect between your sense of humor and mine, and that's where the misunderstanding comes from.It may just be that the sarcasm didn't transfer online, as sarcasm tends not to do.

I think the main issue here that led to this getting out of hand as it did is that tone does not transfer well online. I assumed the lore mention was a genuine point in your argument, just as you seem to assume that I'm being somehow aggressive or leading some burning crusade for the sake of Teh Lore. I'm not. I made a comment that was meant in a mild tone, with a slight tease at the end, yes. But I didn't tease because I consider myself better than you, but because I believe in keeping such discussions light-hearted. Since you misconstrued the tease as "name-calling," I apologize. It was not meant as such.

Skcarkden wrote: »

So how do i *keep* on mentioning it if i said it once, and then you replied with the sheer intent to look superior and merely failed?

This one genuinely hurt, as did the "now you're just lying" comment. I try to stay civil and playful online, and I do not claim to be superior to anyone. I just disagree with what I construed to be part of your point. As I now understand that it's not a real part of the argument you're making, I'll drop it. I've seen other people make the argument, so I'd assumed you were as well. That was my mistake.

Skcarkden wrote: »

You don't have feelings, good for you. Except when you see the word 'lore' then you're seething. Then why are you in this topic or do you just search topics for the word 'lore' and spout the difference between lore and gameplay balancing to get others to blindly 'thank' you without understand the pretext

The bookshelf analogy was to highlight you'd rather correct petty things than see the purpose of what's being said for what it is. You pointlessly telling me i'm not trapped under a bookshelf only further proves this.

Again, you assume I'm seething. I'm not. Honestly, I'm shaking, because I'm alarmed and hurt that my comment, which was meant to be mild, generated such a vehement reaction... and then my second post, where I intended to explain my reaction and try to meet you halfway (and, again, establish that I'm being light-hearted, thus the bookshelf comment), seemed to only make you more upset. I'd never mean to make anyone upset or angry.

More instances of tone not transferring online, I suppose, coupled with our senses of humor not meshing very well. I'll finish up by saying sorry for misconstruing your point and arguing against something you weren't saying. I don't want to take over this thread, so I'll bow out now. If you want to continue this, you're free to PM me.

Skcarkden wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

BlackSparrow wrote: »

Skcarkden wrote: »

I don't care if you find it a non-issue, i still don't think much of it with how excessive it is. Get guards after you? Oh, it turns out ZoS killed lore by making all guards like Scorpio where if you run you get pulled back to them so they can easykill ya and they are immortal to boot.

As a TES lore nerd?

Uh... no.

In games, there is always a certain division between lore and gameplay, because it makes for a better game. For example, is it really realistic, lore-wise, for you to rack up a 5k bounty going on a killing spree at the Vukhel Guard docks, only to have that bounty disappear after a few days? Nope. A murder spree like that should get you on the naughty list for life, no matter how corrupt the watch is... but that wouldn't make for a fun game. Thus, your bounty degrades over time.

So, nope. No using defense-of-lore as a reason to complain about a mechanic you dislike.

People love to pull the "lore-breaking" claim for everything, and they hardly ever are using it right. More often than not, what they are complaining about is either a purely gameplay issue or is not lore-breaking at all and they just don't know enough about the lore to know that (like people who claim that the Any Race, Any Alliance perk is lore-breaking).

And people love to claim someone is pulling the lore breaking claim, like you two.

I guess sarcasm is beyond the comprehension of some people... Ironic that you're both condescending toward me when it should be toward each other. "Oh he mentioned lore, time to ignore the actual point and act all smart"

Yeah, i mentioned lore, and compared guards to Scorpio from mortal kombat, not as a point that it should be removed for lore reasons, but to mock the lazy justice system with it's guards and their lazy "Hey, you're other, and i'm here, imma pull you over here as a cheap shot" routine.

All you've done is effectively proven you're the kind of person to read someone typing on their phone: "help im trapped under a heavy bookshelf and cant get out" and all you can do is focus on the error and correct it to "i'm" and ignore the actual purpose of what was said.

Like i said, don't you think if i actually cared about using lore as a reason to change things that the guard immortality would be argued based on lore reasons as well? Or was the Scorpio reference really just to clever for 2 people acting smart?

Having that, and partially unrelated, they should bring dragons into the game

Sarcasm really doesn't translate well into text, so it is pointless for you to get this worked up.

Lore-accuracy in a TES game is a subject that is brought up really frequently as a legitimate argument, and there was no reason to believe you were not using it as a legitimate argument too.

Your point as a whole was addressed in the rest of the thread, so there is no harm on pointing out that the lore argument specifically didn't stand, especially when we can't read your mind to know you were being sarcastic. What looked like is that you were throwing whatever argument you could in your post to make it even more inflammatory, to be honest, and your attacks against @BlackSparrow really shows that you are here to fight, not to discuss anything.

But I will take a page out of @BlackSparrow 's book and stop this here, too.

@Skcarkden Yeah and they should make Jyggalag appear because why not?

Forestd16b14_ESO wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

BlackSparrow wrote: »

Skcarkden wrote: »

I don't care if you find it a non-issue, i still don't think much of it with how excessive it is. Get guards after you? Oh, it turns out ZoS killed lore by making all guards like Scorpio where if you run you get pulled back to them so they can easykill ya and they are immortal to boot.

As a TES lore nerd?

Uh... no.

In games, there is always a certain division between lore and gameplay, because it makes for a better game. For example, is it really realistic, lore-wise, for you to rack up a 5k bounty going on a killing spree at the Vukhel Guard docks, only to have that bounty disappear after a few days? Nope. A murder spree like that should get you on the naughty list for life, no matter how corrupt the watch is... but that wouldn't make for a fun game. Thus, your bounty degrades over time.

So, nope. No using defense-of-lore as a reason to complain about a mechanic you dislike.

People love to pull the "lore-breaking" claim for everything, and they hardly ever are using it right. More often than not, what they are complaining about is either a purely gameplay issue or is not lore-breaking at all and they just don't know enough about the lore to know that (like people who claim that the Any Race, Any Alliance perk is lore-breaking).

Exactly.

Just a small rant but it "grinds my gears" to put it nicely when players try to sue a lore excuses for something when they don't know lore and when the issue isn't lore related.

Lore isn't a excuse so stop trying to make it a scapegoat.

@Forestd16b14_ESO When theres over 9000 vestiges around the world you still can't help but to scratch your head even if its just for gameplay. Did I mention the vestige is technically fighting for all alliances? Wait what if were all parts of the vestiges soul? What if were actually all the same person? I just blew my own mind and don't know a meme to justify it.

BenLocoDete wrote: »

nordsavage wrote: »

There has to be some semblance of law for players and if guards were killable players would run amuck. Bands of players would do nothing but kill guards and troll kill NPC's to the ire of most players.

The challenge is in the escape.

UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

So is making children immortal, but Skyrim did it anyway.

That is because the world does not need more weirdos, freaks and psychos killing children including digital imaginary children. Not only is something wrong with you if you have a problem with that but it would make the game rating go up if not kill a game all together by allowing children to die at the players hands.

Yeah, *** them farmers, merchants, town citizens, taverners, beggars, dockers and the common rabble but save their poor children so we can kill them in the future!

UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

You mean the occasional genocidal sprees I went on in every major hold in Skyrim, only to reload my save file from right before I began all for the sake of sadistic humor and psychotic tomfoolery?

I miss those...

Then according to @nordsavage you have a problem! And so do I, since I cannot do anything about that - just like the in-game current killing sprees that go on and on by the hands of freshly created characters whose only joy in the game is to wipe a town.

Poor, lost souls. Who knows what suffering they had to endure in the wailing prisons of life.

If Summoning Daedra to attack civilians and completely slaughter the major holds of Skyrim means I have a problem then I am guilty as charged lol