Ways to kill a Death Knight?

Crothu wrote:Death knights are killable just like anyone else.

As for "lighties" allowing death knights who have slaughtered so many innocent people over the last few months or so to surrender? Why icly should we? It is not against any virtue to cut down a undead who has killed a lot of people in fact it more something us "lighties" would do.

I suggest that if your char is caught by the blackhand, would you also be as quick to let them kill you?

Do not get me wrong, the Black hand deserve a response and to die, they have killed a lot of people now. But after "some of them" have died/been executed, the response could die down and a stealthier Black hand emerge from the ashes. (ie dont kill them all as no one benefits from the end of a guild. If Isildor had thrown the ring into the fires as was the sensible thing to do, the LotR would not have been so interesting.) I am sure all involved can sort out a nice conclusion to this part of the story that does not deny any new chapter or cause a guild to end/kill every last one.

As for the mercy of the light, Belfs killed alot of Draenei, and yet we have the scryers. Also Lothar/Turalyon/Doomhammer (If Turalyon had killed doomhammer, WoW would have been very different, almost the same case as the Isildor example)

Vaell wrote:

The Lighties should let him surrender, if he shows he will? If they're true Lighties, they should, but since lately Lighties are all but Lighties

Not if he is swinging his sword around. One of the reasons Drustai has pretty much no support from my char is because instead of coming quietly, she unleashed a massive attack when we went to capture her - endangering the lives of many.

If a DK does the same, they should be slaughtered quickly - and that doesn't break any of the virtues. E.G, look to Uther. He didn't once tell Orcs to surrender when they were attacking a town. If he threw down his sword and time was of the essence, a quick kill would be justified.

I think my main issue with RP is when people who don't want their chars to die, play stupidly. In relation to DKs, a lot of them just expect to get resurected again once they die.

The bold -.-' About Drustai, to be honest I can't say, but I wasn't there. Anyway, I won't open that huge folder here, 'cause I could rant for hours. If you want to know my opinion, get me in-game.

On the last part I agree with a huge -but-. First of all, nobody as a rule wants his/her chars killed, and as such people should find creative ways to avoid killing chars without situations missing sense. People should always keep in mind that killing chars kills usually a lot of rp from a person and usually kills a lot of effort made by the fellow player. To be open to the death of the char and to want or even be happy of its death are quite different things. In any case, it's not like dks only expect their char to be ressurrected once again(not to mention that for dks is tendentailly way simpler than for many other chars).
The but. Sure getting in situation which can potentially get you killed is stupid. Still, people seems to think that, because you OOC are okay for your char to die, then IC your char should just surrender to death or even smile when he gets zerged to death. Sometimes people try to kill chars not because they're doing something stupid, but for stupid reasons, from both OOC and IC pov. In that case, honestly, I don't find wrong the idea of wanting your char to be ressurrected, or even(if you'd eyeroll to resurrections*) godemote yourself out of the situation with a deus ex machina solution.

*Face it, it's wow, people can get resurrected and they will if there are means to do so. Does it break your immersion? Go play another mmorpg.

As for "lighties" allowing death knights who have slaughtered so many innocent people over the last few months or so to surrender? Why icly should we? It is not against any virtue to cut down a undead who has killed a lot of people in fact it more something us "lighties" would do.

It is against the virtues to kill anything which shows he's not going to hurt you and wants only to surrender. That the law, after, would kill him anyway, it's another matter. And this is said by one that IC and OOC, in a similar situation, would agree on killing them all.

The Death Knight is already dead. SO wouldn't be killing.

Muzjhath wrote:The Death Knight is already dead. SO wouldn't be killing.

... I think we need a better definition of killing. Not sure making things dead is a good definition.

Making more dead. Re-deading. Deaderising. Deaderate.

.-.

"Die the true death"

Lexgrad wrote:

Melnerag wrote:

Lexgrad wrote:My point still stands. Do you think they would be better if you gave them any other class? It is not the DKs, it is the players.

Well, DUH?

Exactly my point, why is it endless threads about bad DK RP when it would be more true and constructive to talk about bad RP?

Because this is a thread about DK RP and power of DKs, so this is where I post a statement like: "I don't like when lorewise DK power is used to justify...." I would look damned silly if I postead about warlocks and all the other classes here

On the issue of lighties:
This is more the players fault by now, generally so many evil around. Hand does show mercy sometimes, but killed so many loved ones and so on. Of course unless you want info/torture/etc. or he fights back, virtues or not your first decision is to slay them. Of course everyone wants a piece of the action.

One of the issues i have to combat on -my- Dk, over the years players have diminished the last of the dk respect (The "good" guilds probably more than the cultist ones i belive). So i have to earn it of course, which is kinda fun in the end when i am able to do so.

Now i haven't been in -that- many emote battles that were huge, but i've seen some chaos. Mostly thought i do see people try and do it 1v1, so not zerged by emotes.. Mostly.

I did really had no idea that time in duskwood at that Lighty charge. There was a yell, a charge on my screen and no real significant emotes. Did they run over my dk as well? Did anyone try to kill me? Did they ignore me? *shrug* Saw nothing, but nothing was really wrong in the end.

DK's should know when they are toast, as well as lighties/others. And most do, but then again someone will maybe know they will die anyway, or just plain are angry or such and fight on. (Like dec said slowing someone down). Ooc cominication is good as is the story, everyone should know that by now.

Now still stupid or not some Dks may get into such situations, but still chars run off alone like heroes, now ok if your char is like that (Angry or proud or an idiot), sure. But if a DK gets you when you're alone ... Well *shrug* You run like a idiot back or die like one (Unless you got favor on your side ofc and actually have a plan and knowhow - the way Melnerag stated)

Now personally i do not know (Not shuning) why a military/guard unit has no discipline at times. (Except wild tempest) Bad Ic leadership i'd asume.
Even as funny as the "Battlecade" and baricades are on a very serious IC note, most of my chars ask, why is In charge? Fun all around though anyway, not judging.

You can have good rp and story and even your char not dying all in one and still come out OOC just fine, but as -everyone- by now said diffrently it depends on the player.

Still i know even 2v1 is already a spam emote fight, you can hardly even get close since the other guy is up. That's why you have suport roles, flanking and so on. Why not make a scooby doo trap and lure the Dk into it, while the "tank" is "tanking" the "Boss".

So far i have yet to see all in person, but so far i've seen and heard the good, the just fine and the bad.

AS for charging in, please tell OOCly what are you even trying to hit. What you lack in RP, PvE or in PvP you lack in the other two as well. And the three aren't so far apart as you'd think.

The bold -.-' About Drustai, to be honest I can't say, but I wasn't there. Anyway, I won't open that huge folder here, 'cause I could rant for hours. If you want to know my opinion, get me in-game.

That wasn't me complaining about Drustai, I'm just using her position as an example. Vaell wouldn't now start being civil with her, he'd attack. A death knight on the run who turns and fights should expect the same.

*Face it, it's wow, people can get resurrected and they will if there are means to do so. Does it break your immersion? Go play another mmorpg.

You're missing the point I was making. It isn't that we can or can't ressurect, it is the fact that people abuse that ability. I've seen countless times when people have killed their char off and when someone goes to burn the body, they whisper saying "NO, no! please no!". Yet it makes sense to. Now you may say "This is their character, they can choose if they live or die" but if it ruins MY immersion, how is it fair?

Yes, often there are situations where you can do something other than killing a character, I'm all for that. I encourage it. I have never forced anyone to kill their character, I'd sooner ignore them if the RP didn't make sense. Yet, time and time again, I see murderers/thieves etc being trialled and they beg for "a week in jail/a scolded bum." which puts the judge/executioner in an awkward position of what they can do to still maintain their immersion. If you can't accept consiquences, you shouldn't rp an evil or heroic person unless you're willing to do it with a small crowd of people so it won't ruin it for others.

Don't be so quick to jump on the side of the person not accepting consiquences, as a community, everyone's actions will effect others. Ignoring someone could lead to further problems in the long run as well.

TL;DR Storytelling works both ways in a role-play community. You can't expect to just get away with everything, nor can you expect to take down 1000 baddies/goodies. I'm not saying people can't do this, I'm just warning them to expect a /ignore if they take it too far.


As a side note on DKs; yes, a lot of people play them as bad guys. They fit extremely well in the position, the same way a Warlock would often be a bad guy. Not to mention they can have quite an easy back story to explain it. You should be leniant with the enemy as it creates more RP to keep a story arch going, but they need to also be tolerant of how strong other people's chars might be and be wise when, for example, ambushing a group.

Longknife/Decurius wrote:

Amaryl wrote:there is nothing wrong with 10 people surrounding one DK.

The problem, is it resulting in a fight at all. The DK should simply surrender or run away at the first sign.

stopping and engaging in an emote fight is the wrong choice to make for the DK.

Likewise the lighties once surrounding the dk, should give him the oppertunity to surrender instead of starting the fight.

Once you outnumber the other side, there should be no reason to even engage in Emote-fighting.

Yes and... no.
I agree it makes little sense from an OOC pov to fight when heavily outnumbered or when you outnumber the enemy. But, as always, it's not the OOC that matters but the IC. Example: Black Hand is in Duskwood, Lighties have started a huge zerg against them, with gryphons and such too. One of the DKs stands back to cover the flight for the others. He's been already seen as Black Hand so, even if gets caught, he will probably die. Considering that his goal is to slow the pursuers, of course he will fight, probably dying or being forced to surrender, only to die after, but that it is.
The Lighties should let him surrender, if he shows he will? If they're true Lighties, they should, but since lately Lighties are all but Lighties, but just plated warriors with different levels of zealotry, no to mention Black Hand kills and killed many people, some very beloved, it's normal that the paladins will try to put him down, not waiting for an eventual surrender. They wouldn't let surrender the random dk breaking rules in town, figures a proven member of the cult who killed so many people on a weekly basis.

All this to say: some times what is convenient OOC is, and should be, overruled by what is needed IC. I agree OOC communication is needed and should be done more often, but especially in case of people IC fighting each other, this doesn't happen, 'cause either side wants to win over the other OOC(showing little maturity, but hey, that's how things go), but even so, that OOC level shouldn't force our chars to behave differently than how they would.

Gor'Thrak, love ye.

Vaell wrote:

The Lighties should let him surrender, if he shows he will? If they're true Lighties, they should, but since lately Lighties are all but Lighties

Not if he is swinging his sword around. One of the reasons Drustai has pretty much no support from my char is because instead of coming quietly, she unleashed a massive attack when we went to capture her - endangering the lives of many.

If a DK does the same, they should be slaughtered quickly - and that doesn't break any of the virtues. E.G, look to Uther. He didn't once tell Orcs to surrender when they were attacking a town. If he threw down his sword and time was of the essence, a quick kill would be justified.

I think my main issue with RP is when people who don't want their chars to die, play stupidly. In relation to DKs, a lot of them just expect to get resurected again once they die.

Crothu wrote:Death knights are killable just like anyone else.

As for "lighties" allowing death knights who have slaughtered so many innocent people over the last few months or so to surrender? Why icly should we? It is not against any virtue to cut down a undead who has killed a lot of people in fact it more something us "lighties" would do.

Because the point isn't About fighting. But simply to avoid a situation where one or more participants will most certainly be frustrated and potentially angered OOCly and thus not enjoying the RP to fullest potential.

As will -ALWAYS- happen In a 10 vs 1.


EDIT:

Don't get me wrong - if the Dk decides not to surrender, go shit-kick him with 10 emotes vs 1 at a time.
because he's Oh so tough.
But then don't complain; when your emote is being ignored, or because the Dk takes much more than he should be able to get, or because you can't handle so many emotes against you in one sitting.


But simply because you got 10 guys doesn't mean you shouldn't give the DK a chance to prevent getting into a situation he doesn't want to be OOCly.
And then don't complain: when the DK uses super powers to escape, or ignores half the emotes because he can't handle the spam, or because you don't have the oppertunity to get in an attack and join in on the slaying.

Give them the option of escaping-surrendering -before fighting- OOCly.

If he surrenders, enjoy a fun execution, where both the good guys have their time to shine, and the deadguy gets to go out awesomely too with words of dread etc, and nobody gets frustrated.

Don't be so quick to jump on the side of the person not accepting consiquences, as a community, everyone's actions will effect others. Ignoring someone could lead to further problems in the long run as well.

My resurrection thing was in general, not at you in particular. Still, the whole consequence argument seems somehow IC and especially OOC just one way sided to me. If your char is evil, or is seen as such, then he should just expect to die and shit raining from the sky to him. Instead if he's good, is pretty much not beatable an invincible. I know you've told that this shouldn't be the case, but it is, as far as I've seen.

About dks fitting well in the role of an evil char,, I'm not so sure I agree. Sure, they're creepy and all, but most of all they are forced to become evil. I struggle to keep my DK on the good side without this losing any kind of sense, because any sane person in his place would have already lost it. I could open a hue thing here, but I won't for the sake of not getting OT more than we already are.

Amaryl, the issue is that, most of the times, the good guys overwhelm the bad guys on a 5:1 ratio, if not worse. And, as a bad guy, you can't always avoid the fight, unless the situation becomes awkward, storywise. It's one of the reasons I personally gave up on playing on the evil side.

Well, someone who must survive by killing other things... You don't have to be evil on a DK, but I'd imagine it is much more likely a DK is evil than a farmer.

One thing also worth considering: There are other ways to be defeated than death. You could take serious injuries, be banished, whatever, and put out of commission for a considerable while. Like in those movies where the villain always survives, but you 'win' for a while, anyway.

Still means you can't rp crazy things with that char right away, but at least you can return to it, unlike when it dies.

Longknife/Decurius wrote:
Amaryl, the issue is that, most of the times, the good guys overwhelm the bad guys on a 5:1 ratio, if not worse. And, as a bad guy, you can't always avoid the fight, unless the situation becomes awkward, storywise. It's one of the reasons I personally gave up on playing on the evil side.

You do understand that I said the lighties should offer a way out of it oocly yes? before moving in to fight. be it a simple: Hey you! halt! and wait 3 minutes, before actually moving into encircling a guy.

i'm not saying stay and chat ICly for 10 minutes, but give an ooc window to do something. Just like bad guys should do to lighties.

It has nothing to do with being IC, this has to do with not wanting to be the toughguy superhero/supervillain all the darned time and give the other room to leave, by all means by whispering them: run away -now- or we'll move in to arrest/fight.

and then again, if the dk wants to stay and fight in a 5:1 ratio, well your choice.

Cant fault Amaryl's logic really, or Allonia's "I will recover, and then you will all diiiiiiiieee!" *portals away*

Think more of the story, the whole, rather than the personal, call it social RP if you will.

I prefer to burninate Death Knights.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciwmGnvABE4

I remember Ephitos was burnt to pieces by dwarves with help from the Crimson Flame.

Spyre the cunt and the great betrayal.

Funny how a month later Ironforge offered Ephitos sanctuary from the Stormwind Council.

It's amazing how few people actually try to use fire on death knights.

Drustai wrote:It's amazing how few people actually try to use fire on death knights.

Considering the fact people still walk into duskwood, alone and unarmed, that doesn't suprise me.

siegmund wrote:

Drustai wrote:It's amazing how few people actually try to use fire on death knights.

Considering the fact people still walk into duskwood, alone and unarmed, that doesn't suprise me.

Even more surprising when they walk in alone, knowing OOC and IC that we will go for the kill, accepts it, then begin to whine if they start loosing.

I don't mind if people get upset about dying, if they change their tune I'll let them go, and I'd never go for a kill unless someone actually is okay with it in the first place. I get a little confused when people come into Duskwood for the thrill of running into death knights, or for RP related to us, and then get upset when they are actually attacked. It doesn't bother me, just confuses me a bit.

I guess it is what was described to me as "good scary." People want a roller coaster, but when the track breaks all of a sudden... You want out.

Duskwood, folks, is a very broken track. ;D

This is actually quite an interesting question. I see there has been quite some discussion on this topic and I could bore you with literally pages of biological functions I've theorized on Death Knights. I'll keep it short and simple as much as possible for the sake of sanity.

Killing a Death Knight really depends first on how that Death Knight is perceived into life. There are three types of Death Knights that I have seen played:

1) Vampiric DK: This Death Knight carries a vampiric runeblade that has taken the hosts soul and carries it within the blade. Keep in mind that as a PC you -CAN'T- have a vampiric runeblade. These blades are very uncommon and only a few are actually named within the game. They were given to a select few such as Baron Rivendare and naturally, Arthas himself.
2) Self Anchored DK: This Death Knight is the standard from the starting area. Your soul, through a necromantic process, is bound to your body once again in a similar fashion to the Forsaken. The magics used to bind you however are far stronger which is why you don't see DKs falling victim to things such as brain rot.
3) Runeblade Anchored DK: This is my prefered stance on DKs, that upon forging a runeblade the act of anchoring the soul to the blade can also happen. Theoretically you should be able to change which weapon you are anchored to as it is pointed out if you're found without a runeblade you should reacquire one immediately.

Naturally the anchoring of the soul is quite a hot topic and not what is being discussed here. I will count out Vampiric DKs from this equation as we really shouldn't see any on a PC RP level.

1) Killing a Self Anchored DK

• Holy Light: Any type of holy energy is detrimental to the Death Knight. With enough exposure to holy energy the body can be utterly destroyed or the soul may even be severed from the anchor. Once the corporeal form of a self anchored DK is destroyed, the soul is set free in the shadow realm and will be unretrievable if not immediately reattached.
  
• Fire: With Death Knights, their bodies are made from dead cells. That means that their bodies are quite dry and even a small flame can cause them to ignite. The damage spreads quickly and if a DK is unable to "put themselves out" they risk losing the body entirely and thus losing their anchor.
  
• Necromantic Abilities: Anything that can affect a soul can also severe a link from the anchor. An ability of this nature would require a highly skilled necromancer mind you. Still, even with base necromantic abilities it is possible to cause severe damage to the body of a Death Knight.

2) Killing a Runeblade Anchored DK

• Runeblade Destruction: To destroy a Lich their phylactery must be destroyed or their body will regenerate. The runeblade can act in the same manner. This is the only way to kill a Death Knight of this nature and the destruction of a runeblade is not a simple task as most are comprised of Saronite.
  
• Much with Self Anchored DKs, the corporeal form can be destroyed using Holy Energy, Fire, or Necromantic Abilities. Since their souls are bound through the runeblade however, that adds the extra step to finish them off completely.

As for other discussions I saw in here, I will address my views on them:

1. Decapitation and Severing the Spine: Though a Death Knight needs their spine for support of their body like anything else, severance of the spine will not kill them. Generic undead are anchored via their spine which is why they separate upon death. The Death Knights creation affords them a tremendous advantage in that a simple severance will not destroy them outright. Should the entire spinal cord be destroyed that will be enough which is why decapitation and burning the remains are the recommended way to deal with a Death Knight. Keep in mind that the head, even after decapitation, will retain the ability to speak (depending on where it is severed from). The body may also continue to move of its own volition as the energies that move the Death Knights body run throughout their nervous system and animate the skeletal system (not the muscular system).
   
2. Cutting a Tendon: Death Knights have undergone myopathy which has killed their muscular system. Though the tendons are attached to the bones, they are still primarily used by and a part of the muscular system. If you look at a Forsaken model you'll notice that their legs are generally just bone meaning that the muscles and tendons have rotted. This is because the skeletal system is used for the movement of the body. This is also why Death Knights can potentially be stronger, faster, and more agile than they were during life.

<*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*>

Really as a runeblade anchored Death Knight, I would never let it come down to "you must destroy my runeblade to kill me." There's no reason to let someone utterly destroy your body just because you can be revived. If I am hosting an RP event I have in the past destroyed Eliza's body (not her anchor) for dramatic effects but this is preplanned as an aspect of the event.

It makes me angry to see Death Knights charging into groups of people when the most likely outcome is their destruction. Eliza can easily handle most people 1v1, depending on who's she's up against maybe 2v1 and in a pinch if she's willing to sacrifice great injury she could take on a 3v1. Still, like with any character, there is a threshold you need to understand as an RPer of "This is where my character will not be able to survive." In that type of a situation, Eliza will reluctantly lay down her arms or try to find the best way of avoiding/escaping the fight.

I'm just slightly intrigued here...

Whenever someone on these forums attempts to 'claim' a building, the whole community goes bananas.

However, when someone claims an entire zone under the premise of "enter here, and yo char is gon' die, bitch", everyone is like "Yeah, that seems fair."

Am I the only one confused by that?

You're certainly not.

Though, to be completely fair, I think just whispering the Black Hand folk and saying you've no interest in being jumped/you'd rather not acknowledge the fact they can just "know" when your character enters Duskwood is completely reasonable.

I ain't looking to kick any shit here. I'm just amused by the paradox.