Kalman wrote: »

In all honesty, I think you are playing the wrong type of game if you are a pacifist. I'm actually a little confused on why you would have thought this was a good game for you (as a pacifist). Not all entertainment is intended for everyone. I don't like Rap/Hip Hop so I don't listen to it. I don't like the premise behind a multitude of games so I don't play them. I don't like Orange is the New Black so I don't watch it. What I don't do in any of those instances is ask the artist/business responsible for that content to change it so it suits me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzhyLuXzNZY

Gahurkaness wrote: »

Okay, this is getting silly. Props to the people who actually contributed progressive ideas, which was the point of this thread to begin with. As for the rest of you, I really don't care if you think it fits into the lore, or if you think if fits with a certain cinematic trailer, and I most defintly don't care if you think that there is a need to argue about things that lie completly outside the original post, which was to collect CONSTRUCTIVE feedback on the idea of an alternate progression system.
I wish I hadn't mentioned the pacifist thing - it was merely an attempt to explain why I felt motivated to suggest something that adds and doesn't take away to a fake world, aka a videogame. I did so in the attempt to avoid pointless arguing and assuming about things that does nothing constructive for the idea itself.

Had I known that the exact oposite would happen, then I had not bothered to explain anything beyond the game mechanic idea at all. That is all that is relevant to me. Now that you know this, kindly stop being nonsensical. Like I said right from the get go, the point is to collect feedback of the idea - constructive feedback that is useful to the idea itself, which I should have clarified.

Your personal philosophies could not interest me less.

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

I was making the similarity in terms of scope to our world and the game world, pacifism does not and never has worked.

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

I was making the similarity in terms of scope to our world and the game world, pacifism does not and never has worked.

And I was stating that this "similarity" is :
1/ totally inappropriate
2/ entirely your opinion and no "truth" at all.

Why come with "pacifism does - or doesn't- work" when the question is "how to play a pacifist in ESO ?"

Well you are still completely wrong in your assumptions about what I meant, and that is your opinion as well.

Because pacifism as a rule does not work, period...

For your argument to work either in game or in real life, pacifism to work, then both worlds would be utopia and heaven.

They are not = fact, truth does not care about opinions, it is just fact.j

So again you are wrong in your inane arguments once again.

The question "how to play as a pacifist in ESO", is subject to certain laws and game mechanics in the game, which has some loose parallels in real life, as in pacifism does not work.

The game revolves round death, and if you had even bothered to read what I said, I stated that that I would not mind mechanics being put in place to cater for that type of gameplay, so again learn to read.

ie kiling daedric thingies at dolmens, or indeed killing Molag Bal itself, hardly a act of pacifism.

You can only knock so many out, instead of killing them, and I was under the impression that pacifist means one who does not fight and only believes in peace, so even if hand to hand was implemented and the choice to kill or not was in there, and you could knock enemies out, then it would still be violent.
So even if you could RP as a pacifist in the game, which I personally have no problem with, the game is violent by nature, and the things you do for the greater good is violent.

So this is entirely ,my opinion and no truth at all?

What world do you live on?:P

And your opinion of what I think of being inappropriate or wrong, is of monumental inconsequence to me, really.

Pacifism although a noble concept does not work.

Hardly opinion, where the proof is everywhere that it does not work.

/facepalm

Cernow wrote: »

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

Deus Ex games were brilliant, cannot wait for new one:}

Exactly as you said, less violent way to play is fine, but pacifism is not fighting at all, and I was making the point that pacifism although wondrously noble does not work.

And I have said a few times now that I do not mind this being implemented into this game to cater for that way of playing, I have just said that it does not work ultimately, the game revolves round death.

The use of the word "pacifist" by the OP seems to have totally derailed most of this thread, because everyone seems to have latched onto that and won't let it drop. It's in the thread title, so it's no surprise.

A better term for what is being requested is "non lethal".

Non lethal combat means you still fight when you have to, but wherever possible you knock out, incapacitate, capture or arrest your opponent.

Obviously much of the story is about fighting daedra, demons, undead and all manner of other nasty opponents who aren't likely to listen to reason or be vulnerable to non lethal methods. So those will need to be killed.

But then there are plenty of quests where you are just helping people, investigating a crime, fixing this and that, infiltrating, finding secret documents etc etc. In many cases these really don't need to descend into a full-on bloodbath, but usually they do even if the player tries to avoid it because of the way the game is designed.

For example, you've been asked to find some secret plans in an enemy camp. But because of the way sneaking works and where the quest items are placed, before you know it you've been forced into combat and end up knee deep in corpses. So those secret documents about what the occupants of the camp were planning are now irrelevant because you've slaughtered the entire camp anyway. But the quest giver ignores this fact and politely thanks you anyway.

These are the sorts of quests I feel the OP was referring to and some additional non-lethal methods of completing them would be very welcome.

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

This is a game about fighting devil before it takes over the known world. Molag Bal isn't interested in being reformed (sorry if that is a spoiler). The most passive means to contain his threat is to destroy him. There are no other options.

Some things you just need to kill hehe

Worst possible example actually. Molag Bal (just like any other daedric creature) is actually UNDEAD, which means either immortable or already dead :-) We do not "kill them", we just send them back to Oblivion, and they have to be re-summoned to be able to set foot again on Nirn (unless they use special portal like dark anchors, but even then they have to be summoned and that is why Molag Bal needed Mannimarco and the Worm Cult as allies).

Meridia in her realm explains that to us : we have not killed Molag Bal, just chased him away for a while.

Besides, the OP never asked for a gameplay of "not killing anyone", but for "not killing innocents", in other words, for more RP aspects, more complex moral options and a gameplay more subtle than just "let's kill everything glowing red".

retyler3_ESO wrote: »

Gahurkaness wrote: »

Many of the quests seems to derail into killing many, many people who didn't really deserve it. This doesn't sit well with me, who am a bit of a pacifist and believer in reason to begin with. I also like to be the hero of the story. But because of this, I simply aren't.

So what I'm trying to do here is to gather you guys to share ideas about how to successfully implement alternate paths of advancements through quests that does not involve killing people - or at least not killing those that are not vital to the story. We got stealth and disguises, let's work from that.

Also, wouldn't it be cool if we had a special skill line for purely non-violent skills that increases as you choose peaceful options? And maybe achivements? Make being good rewarding. Then maybe it will come naturally in time.

Ok. I have read through most of the post and your responses to people, and I think you might have ill chosen a few words to possible ask your question or describe your statement; so if I am understanding you correctly here is what I would think would be nice.

One of the options to complete a quest would be instead of hacking and slashing your way through you could sneak past your enemies/opponents to complete your quest, and in doing so you would earn just as many skill points or maybe more for making it past all of them to complete your quest.

Another as someone mentioned earlier being able to knock out people without killing them, but there are several mechanics that would have to be thought out before that could be implemented; or maybe you could say that once they woke you would be flagged for combat and they would come looking for you. Just like every NPC seems to know who the healer is before combat even begins because they cast some kind of protection or heal over time spell on you before combat started.

There is more, but I have to go. I hope this is what you are looking for.

Gahurkaness wrote: »

Absolutely. I imagine that the reward for a non-leathal solution would correspond to the total xp gained for killing every enemy in the quest area one time.