Why are invaders looked down upon?

because I don't want people stealing my stuff and I have the power to enact and enforce such a law.

Is stealing from you wrong? If you answer this with any sort of logic than the answer is yes, which proves my point. Taking from personal experience to conclude to a popular opinion is okay. To exclude popular opinion and still try to define ethical behavior is actually in its nature unethical since most of the civilized world considers such selfishness to be rude and lacking moral principle.

Another point is that reputation is not established by the actions of people

Whhhuuut? You vare saying that because joe is known for murders its not because he murders but because sally said he was? Perception is irrelevant here. Take responsibility for your actions. Again disagreement of mechanics isn't the discussion. It's why reputaations are given to certain playstyles.

Wether or not something degrades your experience is in your mind

I am not taking from personal experience otherwise I would have said so. I am taking from general consensus which Tolvo up there attested to. At this point its probably note worthy to say you feel overwhelmed by the majority opinion.

All that can really be determined is the punishment for going against the majority opinion

This proves my point. If punishment can be handed down then it is clearly decided by the majority that it isunethical and true that the perpetrator is at fault to a commonly agreed upon code or principles of conduct.

As an easy example, by your definition treating blacks as second class citizens was moral for a very long time. I cannot buy into that, it was likely moral for the people who did so, but for me to do so, even during the time period, would be immoral because I believe it to be so.

Your example is flawed and I can tell you that ethics can change but are abesolute until the majority agrees to take the opposite point of view. In the past african people were considered to be second class citizens and many people that were of the opposite opinion were considered unethical. This changed as the overwhelming majority concedeed to the fact they were no different than english people. Laws were changed because of it and africans regained both freedom and rights from the change in ethics. So now it is ethical and abesolute. A racist individual is now seen as unethical and in some cases extreme action of this behavior is looked down upon. Whuut? Did I just wrap up my point and illustrate why it makes sense? Yes, I did.

Music was simply an example of the subjective nature

Which was proven to be a moot example that you did not recognize.

I will get to the rest of your post when I address Reim.

@Reim
I'm sorry, that post was possibly confusing. I said from a gameplay point of view (stand alone) your scenario is ethical and justified. As a whole, however, I feel that spirits are unethical. I evaluated the prospect in a variety of circumstances and the outstanding tally of results left me with the lasting impression that invaders are unethical. I will state however that being unethical is only subjective to perception which states that one could be unethical and be okay with it which is totally different than considering one to be unethical and automatically feel a sense of disapproval. I am okay with being unethical as a Darkmoon. It is in my nature to go against the grain of popular opinion, not by moot choice though. I just tend to lean on my own understanding of things rather than adhere to the majority which does in fact make me unethical under certain topics such as this one.

@Forum: I wish you'd invade with the intent for both parties to have fun, but obviously you don't have to play that way. You can school them badly if you feel that is the best compliment. We've had this conversation before, so I doubt it would change your mind to rehash, but I'll give you an example from my youth.

I grew up in Canada, and hockey is huge here. Since I was 4 I was skating, and was a goalie since 7. There was a new team developed when I was 14, an inner-city team of kids that didn't have the money to play, as equipment and ice time are expensive. So a charity group put this together and got them gear and they had a team.

Every game they were beat 20+ to 0. Schooled over and over. Just to see how discouraged they were was sad. I couldn't let pucks in because I owed it to my team not to, but scoring over and over didn't teach them much. Eventually they quit before the season was out, and I felt terrible for them. Losing is one thing, but being completely schooled doesn't teach you anything. Let them touch the puck and stickhandle a bit and make it seem closer than it is. Getting trashed is disheartening and I wish more people would recognize it.

Dark Souls isn't the same thing. You don't look a player in the eye, you don't see them shut off the game. The other player doesn't have to be in full view forced to play the entire game getting body checked to the ground then scored on. They don't have to see the other player after the game. So no, it's not the same, but there are similarities. I know you say the game is better without these players, but if I knew a player was disheartened after I beat him badly in a match, I wouldn't be happy about it either.

People don't learn by being trashed. They learn by practising, and being guided, and I think the community would be better with better overall skill if players were slowly brought up to that level. So I will play to win, but I won't play to trash my opponent. I always try so that both sides have fun, and I call that a win, even if I lose.

Mark remind me to upvote that tomorrow. Pretty much the heart of my philosophy is realizing my actions' effects on others and trying to make sure we both get the most out of the experience, and learn.

Yes, you accept majority opinion as a higher power, I do not. Your arguement was not necessary, nor is further arguement, you need only say that you accept the majority opinion as a higher power. Thats what I've taken from your arguement.

I do not. Thus we cannot reach an understanding.

EDIT: This is difference at a very basic level, I'd wager it is in how we think, not just what we think. I see your logic now, but you don't seem to understand mine.

If you don't and would like to then pm me and I will try to explain further but it will be an explination, not an arguement. I wouldn't be trying to convince you, merely show you my train of thought.



Sorry mark, I was talking to n0rain. I'll try to be clear later

@Forum, I'm not sure who you're responding to...

oh, I must point out that the reputation of a person or group is ultimately determined by the people outside the group/persons head and how they percieve the group and its actions. Being a d**k won't help it any, it will likely contribute to a bad reputation, but being nice won't necessarily help either.

Actions contribute to a reputation, but the reputation is self is ultimately not under the control of the group. I was not blaming others for my actions, but how dms are seen (ie how I am seen untill one has experience with me and decides to alter their view) is not something I can change.

^ Reason why I have to wear a suit every day. Because obviously I can't do my job if I'm comfortable at work.

Also, non-business hair cuts also mean you can't do your job as well.

Perception is key, and there is a very big difference between the truth of the matter and the perception of the truth. But truth for invasions will be different depending on where you're at in the game.

I thought you were done arguing? Dont you think that further procreating a redundant opinion after explicitly stating you werent going to a breach of integrity?

I wasn't arguing, I was clarifying my opinion in the hopes that you'd at least understand, then informing you of how reputation works. Different things.

Hypocritical and not the least bit affected by it. Even enraged about it. I expected as much based on your previous replies. Its pretty clear your not going to let this go without being a child so all i want to leave on aside from a thank you to reim and mark for not acting out of line and making snarky insinuations is that you forum pirate are absurd to be giving out negative rep over a question.

There has been too much arguing in the forums lately. It seems almost daily that a moderator has to lock a thread over flaming remarks. Remember, this is just a game. I know everyone has strong opinions, but lately the tone of some conversations have been getting disrespectful. I will leave this open for now, but changing the tone of the conversation is encouraged.

@Baal: I also see a lot of thread locking lately.

I administer on a few forums and have some suggestions if you're willing to go into PM. One's a warhammer forum, one is a programming one.

Yeah, I'm wrong about this.

Tell me rain. Do you know what covenant I'm in?

Wait a second, you're in a single covenant?

I do tend to stick with a single covenant, though I still work for others unofficially.

The thing about most people is that we will forever and always to some degree exclude the outgroup.

ie: if you invade and don't host you're more likely to judge hosts in this game critically, and visa versa if you host you're likely to critically judge invaders. Whoever you identify with, you will think is the "better"


In reality both are constructs within the game, every element of what each player is capable of doing has been given a lot more thought that I think a lot of players understand. There's a reason certain gestures have a sort of "attitude" about them. Its to make the person on the receiving end a little bit angry.

But thats a bit beside the point. I'm assuming most people on here are at least in middle school, if not highschool and I know many of you are much older than that. But you've all been in situations where someone was instigating a fight. Thats the same thing as gesturing after a kill. Many times people want you to get angry. Maybe they even want an angry message from you. Some people send that angry message first and try to get you to react. They're just trolls. The hosts that hack and gank you and then give you the "well what is it", they're just trolls. Who have nothing better to do than exploit the game and ruin other people's fun.

Now something I've learned in dark souls is that when you come against something you don't like (invaders, hackers, bad sports, a tough area whatever) you have one of two options. You can complain about it and get nowhere. You can stop playing the game, maybe come back to it, maybe leave it because its not for you. Or you can overcome it which is what so much of this game is about.

But after reading this entire thread I think the most important thing many here need to take is that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. So if someone thinks that a hacker getting invaded is crappy for the hacker, well let them think that. If someone doesn't like darkwraiths because they think that all darkwraiths are bs fishers, let them think that. It'll make you feel a lot better.

+1 Err to me that makes sense. I guess I really was judging hosts critically....

That basicall answered my question about why the community is the way it is.

Which is why people should follow my tactic, of doing every single thing in the game.

@Tolvo, thats basically what I've done. I've played as many different kinds of characters, and I've invaded/hosted many different ways. You learn that each one has its own advantages and disadvantages.


I think something that gets under a lot of people's skin is the taunting. Especially on the wiki as many of us have a sense of "honor" during pvp.

If it's something in Dark Souls I haven't done, it doesn't exist I say haha.

Except with the new content.

But yeah, I just say respect your fellow player. Hell maybe a bit unreasonable, but even respect those who don't respect you in turn.

Yeah Im going to try so solid co op for a while. With a new Carim Knight!

Maybe I should make a guide to being friendly.

Id like that/ So much time on the other side of the fence has skewed my Co Op play.....