Why is "safing" bad?

[walka92]

i see nothing wrong with safeing

 

 

 

if uve got food you are allowed to use it when ever you want. wich i do

 

 

 

SAFEING FOR LIFE!

[lchaosl]

Safing is bad because it takes the point out of PKing.

 

 

 

People PK not for loot, but for the excitement. If both players safe, neither player has any chance of getting k0ed. Therefore, you're both wasting food, potions, and time. The fight is pathetically boring and therefore no one wants to fight you.

 

 

 

It's called "professional courtesy". If you give them a fair chance of winning, they give you a fair chance of winning, both people enjoy the fight more.

 

 

 

And if you're too scared to risk the items, then you shouldn't expect people who enjoy taking risks to fight you. They're better off fighting other people who are willing to take the risks.

 

 

 

 

 

perfectly stated. everyone would just be run from fights with full health and no one would get any kills. the fun of pking would be lost. i personally die if im going to and dont run. people who run from fights are people who want to save their money, which is fine, but dont go in the wild in the first place.

Thats just plain stupid. Where is the fun in losing your stuff? Even if you like losing your stuff that is no reason to go zomg safer!!1!1! to people who don't. And don't go into the wild? No thanks, I would rather kill you and save my money.

[NoMoreDead]

I believe that safing is A-OK. Especially at low levels, but at all levels as well. Going into the wildy and being pked is no fun, especially if you weren't in there for a fight. If you were in there for a fight, and you get overmatched, then leave. There is nothing the other player can do about it. I'm sorry you couldn't kill me. If I have the option to keep my possessions rather than lose them, I'll take the keep option 100%. If you don't like it, don't complain.

 

 

 

This is the first time I can ever say this without feeling completely idiotic.

 

 

 

"Don't hate the player, hate the game" (for giving the other player the option to eat).

[Sly_Wizard]

Okay... I haven't been PK'ing in a while and I've seen the term used by others on the RSOF, but I never really took the time to understand what it meant. Now that I have, I just wanted to say 'safing' is the most idiotic, inane and moronic thing I've ever heard people complain about and the person who came up with it should be beaten silly with a raw tuna and then banned from Runescape forever.

[meb]

I only pk on my pure (a lvl 43 str pure, f2p) with 50 hp. I generally eat once I drop below 20. If I would eat every time I dropped below 38, it would make the fight very dull. That is why I don't safe eat, and I expect my opponent to do the same so we both have fun. And the people that say that pking is not about loot but about fun have never PKed before or are just trying to act 'grown up'. The goal of PKing is trying to kill your opponent knowing he has expensive gear (more than the average monster anyway). I don't think many people would enjoy pking in RS if there were no reward at all;.

[devial1]

I'll just say this, I put chat o friends and safe away cause IDC it's my account and I'll choose how I want to PK. You don't control me, why should I let you kill me.

 

 

 

It's annoying when they say that to me. I'm a skiller, I train everything so that means I don't have the perfect PKing skills, but I got enough to not die and somehow get a KO even when they safe.

 

 

 

If you can kill a so called "safer" then your are a Pker and if you call them a safer then your not a PKer, just a wana-be.

[Alg]

safing is only bad for loot-pkers. they want stuff, they're willing to use that weak insult if they can't get it.

 

 

 

i can't see why safing would ruin it for excitement pkers. it lengthens the fight, meaning it can be better for both sides if they want fun. seriously, where's the fun in a 20- second win?

[phiagre]

I would rather safe then die.

 

 

 

Exactly. You rather not die. So go fight the other people that are out there for loot.

 

 

 

Some people are out there because they enjoy the risk, as well as the higher chance of rewards. Therefore, it's courtesy to fight people with an equal attitude towards the chances of dying. If you choose to safe, and whoever you're fighting would rather not waste their food and time, then they're at perfect liberty to run.

 

 

 

Flaming IS an issue though. The way I see it, just telling the other person you don't want to fight is fine. Calling people safers doesn't make things better. The only reason anyone should flame for this is if you persist in trying to attack them even if they've made it clear they will not fight you.

 

 

 

The WILD. Anything goes. And it takes the "fun" out of it if you can't: Run, Pray, Surprise Attack, Tag Team, Safe, Bind, Ensnare, Entangle, Farcast... Etc. Etc Etc. I don't DO these, but there are no rules in the Wild. Well... I guess, besides the RS rules... ANYTHING GOES!!!!!

[Trevor]

No being able to 3-hit anymore = boring PKing

[TheWilch]

No being able to 3-hit anymore = boring PKing

 

 

 

since when can you use a dds in runescape classic.

 

 

 

and in runescape, 99 str and att. i have no problem killing some 1 with 4 dds specials.

[Wootcannon]

No, it's not bad. This is the same as saying "prayer noob" "tele noob" "defence noob" etc. What they really mean is "I want to win but you have an advantage so I might lose! Not fair!" despite the fact that they came in knowing that anyone they attack, or that attacks them, might be able to block attacks, teleport away if they're losing, heal hitpoints etc. It has nothing to do with "honour" and everything to do with them wanting your stuff at no risk, basically an evolution of "phr33 st00f pl0x".

 

 

 

Of course, I don't mean to degrade those who want to fight with "honour", but don't complain about that in the Wilderness. There are no rules in the Wilderness for fighting. If I have an advantage that I have worked for, then I have every right to use it. If you want "honour", or someone not having any advantages against you, or in the true sense that is used by many players, that of a fight of luck and skill, then use the duelling arena, where you can set such rules.

 

 

 

If you go into the Wilderness, then you accept that you might die. Others go prepared to lessen that risk, or have skills they can use to lessen that risk. Just because they chose to be more prepared than you, or work on those skills for an advantage over you, gives you no right whatsoever to complain.

[dtbrehm]

i agree with everyone who says that its ok to "safe". sure theres those who want to fight with "honour", but what's the point of food then. if i took the time to make food, or buy it, surely i'm going to use it.

[foodmanfood1]

although safing makes people angry because they can t eaisly get a kill, it is a good tactic, and in the wildy anything goes, just becuase people say "dont be a noob, dont pray" doesnt mean u have to listen, as for teleing, thats fine, live to fight another day kinda thing, but its kinda cowardly, thats why it is frowned upon, but u still have the right to do it, U CAN DO ANYTHING, BUT JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN, DOESNT MEAN YOU SHOULD!

 

 

 

=D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

[Lemeja]

Lol I dont know why people complain about safing. It just makes you have less food for when they dds spec you and gives them a greater chance of koing you since you can't heal.

[GrimHams]

Safing is bad because it takes the point out of PKing.

 

 

 

People PK not for loot, but for the excitement. If both players safe, neither player has any chance of getting k0ed. Therefore, you're both wasting food, potions, and time. The fight is pathetically boring and therefore no one wants to fight you.

 

 

 

It's called "professional courtesy". If you give them a fair chance of winning, they give you a fair chance of winning, both people enjoy the fight more.

 

 

 

And if you're too scared to risk the items, then you shouldn't expect people who enjoy taking risks to fight you. They're better off fighting other people who are willing to take the risks.

 

 

 

 

 

perfectly stated. everyone would just be run from fights with full health and no one would get any kills. the fun of pking would be lost. i personally die if im going to and dont run. people who run from fights are people who want to save their money, which is fine, but dont go in the wild in the first place.

Thats just plain stupid. Where is the fun in losing your stuff? Even if you like losing your stuff that is no reason to go zomg safer!!1!1! to people who don't. And don't go into the wild? No thanks, I would rather kill you and save my money.

 

 

 

Its pretty obvious you dont pk often, if you safe eat you hardly get any rounds in because you're constantly eating = you aren't going to ko someone. Someone who doesn't "safe" doesn't wait for 5hp before eating, they just dont over eat because they'd prefer to risk their stuff more to get more rounds in and win over eating constantly and pking nothing.

 

 

 

I'm not an "honourable" pker anyway, if i were to join a clan (when i get higher cb) i'd probably join a nh clan, "honour" has nothing to do with safing, its just about both people actually trying to kill eachother and with experience in pking comes the need to risk your stuff even more so you can have a better chance of koing someone. Its not like you're never going to die pking so you might as well take that extra risk to make it more FUN and the reward more likely.

[ugafan_2009]

i agree with everyone who says that its ok to "safe". sure theres those who want to fight with "honour", but what's the point of food then. if i took the time to make food, or buy it, surely i'm going to use it.

Well, you're going to waste all your food and never get a kill if you and your opponent safe.

 

 

 

Of course you can use food, that's perfectly "honorable". But eating at 50 hp, that's a no no. :shame:

[tintin113]

It isn't bad, if it were in irl, then it would be called ''surviving'' but as this is a game, people think that they can get their own way all the time.

[ugafan_2009]

It isn't bad, if it were in irl, then it would be called ''surviving'' but as this is a game, people think that they can get their own way all the time.

That's the worst argument I have heard about safing being good.

 

 

 

Since when does eating give you hit points in real life?

[walka92]

safeing > dieing

 

 

 

safe or die...safe :P

[niels586]

Well this is what I think. I think that the pures who call someone a safer should search for people with the same opinion that safing is bad. If you play soccer you wouldn't run to a tennis club and shout: Z0miG4wd y00 t3nn1s n3wbs..

 

 

 

So in my opinion safers should fight safers and if you don't agree, use bind or barrage or teleblock or whateva to keep your victim with you.

 

 

 

~Niels586

[Mico]

Don' t you see? Safer=safe. They' re safe from dieing. Ofcourse if you heal at half hp, then it' s just stupid, you won' t hit a single good hit. But pures hate is since they can' t land the finishing blow, so they rant. My oppinion.

[AznSteve]

"Safing" is a point of view. Whether it is good or bad depends not on other people's points of views, only yours.

[GrimHams]

Someone who safes please try to argue against my point here:

 

 

 

I've spent a lot of my rs time in the wild, and after a while i've realised that if you over eat (safe) you won't get pks. Whats the point in going in the wild and eating at half health and often because you won't get sufficient rounds in to kill someone. The only time that safing is beneficial is if you're in multi combat or tagging on someone. Otherwise your overeating means that you won't get a pk as well as the other person, you won't win many fights if you overeat which defeats the point in going to the wild. - to pk people.

 

 

 

I have no problem with when people eat but when they try to justify it by foolishly thinking they'll get a load of pks even if they safe well they're deluded or not experienced in single combat pking. I've seen a lot of "i eat so i dont die", yeah you don't die but you certainly don't get many pks.

[tryto]

90% of the time, those pures(yes they are almost always pures)after pking you after they stop you from eating by calling you a safer, will turn around and safe against their next opponent. It's just peer pressure trying to trick you into going through the death animation to take your items, which they cant get if you safe and they cant KO you with their r2h

[Kevin_]

I don't really c are about safing, it's just an excuse to get easier kills ;).