Goblin Squad Member
|
@Keign, what incentive does a bandit, or anyone else for that matter, have to submit, and literally lose the ability to play the game, rather that just dying and losing their unthreaded stuff? Sure, they might have something really valuable on them they want to keep, assuming being incarcerated doesn't let them loot you either (guards make off with your stuff while you're locked up?). Role-play is not an incentive. Roleplayers do not need a mechanic for this. A mechanic is to enforce it on people who *wouldn't* do it anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Keign, what incentive does a bandit, or anyone else for that matter, have to submit, and literally lose the ability to play the game, rather that just dying and losing their unthreaded stuff? Sure, they might have something really valuable on them they want to keep, assuming being incarcerated doesn't let them loot you either (guards make off with your stuff while you're locked up?). Role-play is not an incentive. Roleplayers do not need a mechanic for this. A mechanic is to enforce it on people who *wouldn't* do it anyway.
There is no forcing the idea... the game is intended to be an open world for MEANINGFUL pvp.. not "im a highwayman and a bandit and Im going to take your stuff and there is nothing you can do about it" in reality there are consequences for bandits thieves and murderers... thus the bounties.. without in game consequences for behaviour that does nothing but upset other players (victoms of bandit antics) the entire game would be nothing more than meaningless PVP and chaos.. there should not be incentive for players to be inconsiderate to others; in fact it should be quite the reverse which is exactly what was proposed here. So don't be blinded by a good idea just because you want a fantasy clone of Eve Online.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Gerrik, I'm not sure what that has to do with my post. Someone was suggesting that incarceration would somehow be acceptible if people could instead choose to fight to the death. I am asking in what situation people would voluntarily choose to give up their ability to play the game rather than take the death penalty. If there is no such case, or it's sufficiently rare, then there is no gain to creating a game mechanic for it. If people just want it for RP, there doesn't need to be a mechanic.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Dario, if you've been reading my posts, you should know that I'm NOT in favor of someone sacrificing their ability to play the game while imprisoned. Quite the opposite, I have suggested having abilities to enable escape, at any point. Because I don't want people to keep getting locked up and lose their taste for play, and I don't want griefing to take the form of catching people and throwing them into a place where they can't do anything.
The only 'mechanical' incentive I can see is that by serving your time 'lawfully' the only thing you lose is time - no equipment or goods will be taken from you.
But the main appeal of this is choice, and variety, and layered interactions.
Maybe someone would rather be captured than killed, as a personal preference. Because they, personally, want to give more weight to dying than the game's mechanics do. Or, because they are playing a character who COULD feasibly break out of incarceration, and actually overcoming that challenge would be fun.
I do not think it's a stretch at all to think that many players would sooner submit than die - most people would in real life, after all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yet if the rationale is that they would prefer to be captured than killed, do they need a mechanic to force them into captivity rather than simply volunteering to RP that way?
Granted, it could be as much griefing to imprison someone as to murder them, but isn't that a reason to forbid such a mechanic rather than build it?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Of course someone could roleplay this, however...
With the way death has been trivialized in the game, I believe instituting a mechanic to encourage it may be desired.
Mostly, I'm trying to find ways to make the ideas that started this thread feasible and fun. Could it be done without mechanics added into the game? I suppose - but I don't think it would happen much, and I think that's sad.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Im not sure if i like jail time. As others have said you force people to stop playing and log out, or they just stop playing and stay logged in until its over while they are doing something else.
So jail time wont really work unless its in game time, so if you got 4 hours of jail you spend 15 minutes in jail then log off. When you log on the next week you still have 3 hours 45 minutes to spend in jail.
So how about this. The jail bounty is an extra. Jail time is based on how many kills in "safeish" areas you have (if you kill someone in the lawless outlands that doesnt count for this, lowsec is lowsec). Not only that but the person placing the bounty has to pay extra to throw them in jail, it would be a (very) large amount of money, and could only be done once, even if you choose to put 10 bounties against the person.
Going to jail confiscates all items you have looted off of player corpses (say for the last 24 hours or something), then the jail also takes an item or two or three as a fee. After time served they let the person go to find their way back.
Also i would like to see a way to discourage working around the bounty system. For example some bandits are using good gear so they can actually be a threat, however once they kill a bunch of merchants, they trade their gear to an alt who holds it, that way when the merchant brings his friends the bandits dont lose gear. I propose that when you start attacking someone that flags you criminal a couple of things happen.
1) the gear you are wearing becomes marked
2) You are unable to trade the gear you have on you with another player.
3) you are unable to sell the gear
4) you cannot destroy the gear (basically get rid of it so the people killing you cant get it)
5) You can take off the gear and put it into a bank
6) When you are killed for your bounty the marked gear can also be looted no matter where you put the gear
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Gerrik, I'm not sure what that has to do with my post. Someone was suggesting that incarceration would somehow be acceptible if people could instead choose to fight to the death. I am asking in what situation people would voluntarily choose to give up their ability to play the game rather than take the death penalty. If there is no such case, or it's sufficiently rare, then there is no gain to creating a game mechanic for it. If people just want it for RP, there doesn't need to be a mechanic.
perhaps it was the wording that made me think you were trying to convey something else; however, in regards to the current argument, I don't believe it would be up to the antagonist of a bounty to die or be taken prisoner.. it would be up to the protagonist or in this case the bounty hunter as to whether or not the situation would allow for him to take the victom alive..
Yet if the rationale is that they would prefer to be captured than killed, do they need a mechanic to force them into captivity rather than simply volunteering to RP that way?
Granted, it could be as much griefing to imprison someone as to murder them, but isn't that a reason to forbid such a mechanic rather than build it?
@ Being: I believe you may have some concepts confused.. according to wikipedia the definition of a "Griefer" is as follows:
A griefer is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game, using aspects of the game in unintended ways.[1] A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities, since griefers often cannot be deterred by penalties related to in-game goals.
what we are talking about here with the implementation of an imprisonment feature is not considered a griefing mechanic for several reasons:
1) It provides an in game mechanic for dealing with characters that operate outside of the law (outlaws, Bandits, highwaymen, etc...) In truth, this is a very realistic concept BECAUSE it works in our own societies today... although it has it's flaws.. incarceration is a valid deterant for almost any crime.. which brings me to why I think this is a good idea in the first place.. Is character death a large enough in game penalty for dealing with criminal PCs? Really that is what this post boils down to.
2) Adding this kind of a mechanic to this game also adds a great dynamic to the political structure of the game and allows for crimes to be scaled appropriately.. is it really realistic to have the in game penalty for every crime be death????!! seriously "I only stole a candy bar and youre gonna kill me?!!" ... "yep"... how the hell is that fair play?
3) Incarceration as it is proposed is not going to be a "time-out" it would be a dynamic all it's own with its own social structures and mechanics to keep "prisoners" occupied and enticed. like the OP mentioned before, perhaps some people will HAVE to get into a prison in order to complete some sort of contract.. get information from a particular person and then break them out.
All I am trying to say is that the proposed idea may not be perfect but it has elements and dynamics that could be applied very well to this type of setting. And it isnt your duty as a crowdforger to shoot down ideas like this specifically because you dont like them or because you dont thing they will work but instead work with the idea, consider it seriously.. and make a descision that isnt based on personal opinion but rather on reasoning. Leave GW to decide whether its a good idea or not but let's try and polish this idea so it can get to that point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As soon as you have players using the incarceration mechanic to imprison the innocent, especially anyone unjustly accused, then you have a griefing situation. The bounty hunter has not been killed by the suspect: Unless there are safteties put in place he could walk up and 'capture' the wrong guy. Me, for example. He might 'capture' someone he just wants to pick on, and extort payment in some form to let the player out.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As soon as you have players using the incarceration mechanic to imprison the innocent, especially anyone unjustly accused, then you have a griefing situation. The bounty hunter has not been killed by the suspect: Unless there are safteties put in place he could walk up and 'capture' the wrong guy. Me, for example. He might 'capture' someone he just wants to pick on, and extort payment in some form to let the player out.
Dont think that is likely to happen in an MMO where you can only be flagged for murder if you actually murder somone.. and also with the proposed ways this would be handled; certain conditions would have to be met for characters to actually undergo imprisonment... the reasons for why people get wrongfully imprisoned in the real world are vast. However in a game where things are certain I don't think you will find anyone wrongfully imprisoned.
certain conditions already have to be met for characters to draw up a bounty contract against a character..
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Dont think that is likely to happen in an MMO where you can only be flagged for murder if you actually murder somone.. and also with the proposed ways this would be handled; certain conditions would have to be met for characters to actually undergo imprisonment... the reasons for why people get wrongfully imprisoned in the real world are vast. However in a game where things are certain I don't think you will find anyone wrongfully imprisoned.
certain conditions already have to be met for characters to draw up a bounty contract against a character..
You may consider the criminal flagging system infallible, but I promise if you give griefers half a whit of incentive, they will find a way to get other people flagged. False flagging *will* happen. And if you put in an incarceration system, innocent people *will* have their play time taken away from them. And they will quit, justifiably so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Dont think that is likely to happen in an MMO where you can only be flagged for murder if you actually murder somone.. and also with the proposed ways this would be handled; certain conditions would have to be met for characters to actually undergo imprisonment... the reasons for why people get wrongfully imprisoned in the real world are vast. However in a game where things are certain I don't think you will find anyone wrongfully imprisoned.
certain conditions already have to be met for characters to draw up a bounty contract against a character..
You may consider the criminal flagging system infallible, but I promise if you give griefers half a whit of incentive, they will find a way to get other people flagged. False flagging *will* happen. And if you put in an incarceration system, innocent people *will* have their play time taken away from them.
And they will quit, justifiably so.
I guess thats where our point of view differs because I think thats a total excuse and nothing more. I played wow for nearly 6 years without being incorrectly flagged and killed on a PVP server. point being, flagging works... as long as GW is one step ahead of griefers you wont have any problems.
and again noone said anything about playtime being taken away. you just start into another dynamic... you will still be playing possibly trying to put together some kind of escape... its not a time out from the game that the OP was proposing its just another meaningful obstacle that your character must overcome.. but if youre so unimaginative and dull that you cant see that then maybe youre advocating for the wrong game...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So what you are saying Dario is that no matter what system is used to help control griefing it will not work. So why bother playing at that point?
Well Provos we might want to consider going with what Goblinworks has already proposed instead of going all vigilante on your fellow gamers.
Well, maybe that was too harsh. You probably don't deserve that.
But consider: Not all people who enjoy PvP are going to be playing Evil characters. There are entire player organizations, the largest so far in the game matter of fact, whose express purpose is nailing griefers to the wall and letting their hides tan. Then they'll stake them out on a fire ant hill to be eaten alive. Then they'll decide to punish them too.
If you have possees of knights and fighters and paladins who are totally into PvP harking all over the countryside and back just looking for these malefactors don't you suppose there might be some incentive for griefers to keep at least a low profile? If that isn't enough you're going to have Tony's Legitimate Bread hunting them down with their assassins. They can't enter a Lawful Good town, likely no Good town period, PLUS they will have the True Neutrals watching them like a hawk, or a tree, or a panther, or a bear. On top of all that they can't fast travel with a criminal flag on them, which removes a big part of their mobility. I wouldn't be surprised if there are wanted posters pasted everywhere with their name and likelness.
Might give them pause.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Being: But this conversation isnt just about griefing... its about dealing with other in game crimes with an in game mechanic... there WILL be societies that have laws against things like stealing, fraud, etc... what mechanic has GW provided against those as of yet??? with the exception of alignment changes and reputation.. as far as I know there is none... thats why I like this idea.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But Gerrik that is just it: WE are supposed to play the game. WE are supposed to handle it, and with the ability to work together and coordinate our efforts we can. IF we have the will, the wit, and the wisdom to do it. If we don't we will have earned the world we allowed to happen. It is a sandbox. It can be evolved into an enlightened world, but the Devs cannot enlighten it for us we have to do it ourselves.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But Gerrik that is just it: WE are supposed to play the game. WE are supposed to handle it, and with the ability to work together and coordinate our efforts we can. IF we have the will, the wit, and the wisdom to do it. If we don't we will have earned the world we allowed to happen. It is a sandbox. It can be evolved into an enlightened world, but the Devs cannot enlighten it for us we have to do it ourselves.
which is exactly why this is being discussed. The developers wont be the ones handling improsonment...PLAYERS are... it is a tool that is being discussed not having the DEVs solve our problems for us.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would recommend each settle ment should have a Marshall and Deputies who have the ability to enforce settlement laws without having to worry about their alignment. They should be periodically reviewed by the citizens of that settlement to ensure they are being Just and Fair to all, without regard to alignment orientation. All are equal before the law whether that law be lawful evil or lawful good or lawful neutral. The rest of us less lawful types will just have to figure out how to coexist with you, hopefully even thrive with you.
So if you are looking for a mechanic to help, let your Marshall and his Deputies have special dispensation to do what is necessary, subject to citizen review, but otherwise immune from criminal flags.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
there are so many problems with that its almost hard to discuss.
1) there is no check or balance on that.. how would you be absolutely sure the sherrif or marshal was being fair.
2) whats to stop them from making descisions against alignment if there is no alignment consequence when a descision is made.
3) what control would they even have to keep the peace besides kiling people??? other than that my guess is ... nothing. "hey you, you better stop that or else!" " or else what!? ... make me !" this especially wont work for small crimes .
4) what is to stop people like this from becoming zealots to their cause and exerting their controls (if any) on others especially if the marshal or sherrif is wrong... you will have a lot more people wrongfully judged under this system than any other
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So you want all players to be able to imprison one another?
you must not have read the OP or several of my posts because I explained in each one.... you will not be able to imprison ANYONE unless specific conditions are met.
example:
1) A bounty must be up for the person specifically naming for capture (see the blog on contracts for more).
2) the character in question must be CAPTURED not killed.
3) the time must match the crime (you stole a candy bar you get 5 minutes in the box)
I think it would be better to have the character that did weong brought before the character that put up the bounty and talk things over and if things cant be resolved then they are imprisoned.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So you want everyone to be able to confine each other for anything they feel like, right? Or are you appointing yourself the omniscient judge?
YOU CAN ONLY ENACT A BOUNTY IF YOU ARE WRONGED!!!! YOU CANT ARBITRARILY THROW UP A CONTRACT FOR ANYONE!!! that has already been decided by the GW staff...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
there are so many problems with that its almost hard to discuss.
1) there is no check or balance on that.. how would you be absolutely sure the sherrif or marshal was being fair.
Citizen review. The citizens can take away his office if he is out of line, and if necessary banish him and, if warranted, his deputies.
2) whats to stop them from making descisions against alignment if there is no alignment consequence when a descision is made.
They are elected, and know they can lose their immunity if found unjust or unfair, and could lose everything when banished.
3) what control would they even have to keep the peace besides kiling people??? other than that my guess is ... nothing. "hey you, you better stop that or else!" " or else what!? ... make me !" this especially wont work for small crimes .
There are other ways than death, such as expulsion from the settlement.
4) what is to stop people like this from becoming zealots to their cause and exerting their controls (if any) on others especially if the marshal or sherrif is wrong... you will have a lot more people wrongfully judged under this system than any other
Better than having everyone able to confine each other intrminably for a whim of their opinion. Because if you don't give the power to confine someone to everyone who do you propose should be able to do that to another player? You?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So you want everyone to be able to confine each other for anything they feel like, right? Or are you appointing yourself the omniscient judge?YOU CAN ONLY ENACT A BOUNTY IF YOU ARE WRONGED!!!! YOU CANT ARBITRARILY THROW UP A CONTRACT FOR ANYONE!!! that has already been decided by the GW staff...
Right, and you want to get around that by allowing a capture mechanism so you can grief people who haven't wronged you by making there characters unplayable.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
there are so many problems with that its almost hard to discuss.
...
Funny thing about things that are hard to discuss. They usually aren't thought all the way through. Part of the objective of conversations like this are to help each other think things all the way through.
It is dialectical reasoning. Dialexis is literally 'all the way through'.
You have a thesis, I have an antithesis. By talking the problem out we theoretically should arrive at a satisfactory synthesis of the respective positions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
there are so many problems with that its almost hard to discuss.
1) there is no check or balance on that.. how would you be absolutely sure the sherrif or marshal was being fair.
Citizen review. The citizens can take away his office if he is out of line, and if necessary banish him and his deputies.
2) whats to stop them from making descisions against alignment if there is no alignment consequence when a descision is made.They are elected, and know they can lose their immunity if found unjust or unfair, and could lose everything when banished.
3) what control would they even have to keep the peace besides kiling people??? other than that my guess is ... nothing. "hey you, you better stop that or else!" " or else what!? ... make me !" this especially wont work for small crimes .There are other ways than death, such as expulsion from the settlement.
Better than having everyone able to confine each other intrminably for a whim of their opinion. Because if you don't give the power to confine someone to everyone who do you propose should be able to do that to another player? You?
4) what is to stop people like this from becoming zealots to their cause and exerting their controls (if any) on others especially if the marshal or sherrif is wrong... you will have a lot more people wrongfully judged under this system than any other
A citizen review will not work! Some people just don't care.. you have a whole nation of idiots 70 percent of which dont even freaking vote IRL and you expect them to take any interest in something as petty as "this guy isnt doing what I think is right". In a lot of cases thats going to be a matter of opinion. not only that but you could be inciting grief by kicking someone out of that position when he thought he was doing a good job but the person who got judged rose a vote and got him kicked out.. how is that right???
some people wont give a crap about their positions.. after all it is a video game.. corruption is everwhere.. whats to stop that when he has no alignment or reputation consequences.. or on the other end you have people tip toeing every line because they are afraid they are going to judge somthing wrong causing unnessesary stress for the person playing the game... games are about having fun not being stressed out..
the more people you kick out of a kingdom the less of a kingdom you have.. yes its a viable option but again that should be reserved for petty crimes.. kicking someone out of a kingdom (especially when thats all that character knows) could be seen as even worse than spending a bit of time in prison where you can still do stuff.. break out, organize, bribe, etc.. you advocate against the improsonment idea for specific reasons then propose somthing thats even worse .. I wonder about you..
You cant have system without working cogs.. without appropriate checks and balances your machine will fall apart.. and again you can only enact a bounty if something happens to trigger that option.. its up to the person that was wronged to decide... not me, not you, and certainly not some other stressed out player that has a bug up his but to play a paladin.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So you want everyone to be able to confine each other for anything they feel like, right? Or are you appointing yourself the omniscient judge?YOU CAN ONLY ENACT A BOUNTY IF YOU ARE WRONGED!!!! YOU CANT ARBITRARILY THROW UP A CONTRACT FOR ANYONE!!! that has already been decided by the GW staff...Right, and you want to get around that by allowing a capture mechanism so you can grief people who haven't wronged you by making there characters unplayable.
wrong.. I want it to work WITH the bounty option.. you get the OPTION of bringing that person back instead of outright killing them! its not up to anyone but the person who recieved the prompt and the bounty hunter.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Who do you propose should adjudicate any given case?
thats the point.. its a game you dont have to adjucate if its automatic..
you kill someone unlawfully, you are flagged for murder.
you steal somthing you are flagged as a thief..
you commit fraud you are flagged for fraud... Etc...
Because this is a game we can do better than trials in the real world.. you will only get those flags if you actually commit a crime.. I.E. if you get flagged, the person you wronged recieves the option of sending out a bounty .. some bounties its possible depending on the severity of the crime that they will be capture only .. at which point it should be up to the antagonist and the protagonist of the contract to resolve the issue.. if it cannot be resolved because either the protagonist wants justice or because the antagonist will not yield.. then the sentence would be carried out.. whether that be banishment, imprisonment, payment, etc..
with the exception of the capture feature and the imprisonment feature.. this is pretty much how contracts are going to work..
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
A citizen review will not work! Some people just don't care.. you have a whole nation of idiots 70 percent of which dont even freaking vote IRL and you expect them to take any interest in something as petty as "this guy isnt doing what I think is right".
What do you propose should be your substitute for democracy in your settlement?
In a lot of cases thats going to be a matter of opinion.
If it is the opinion of the majority then it is the opinion that counts.
not only that but you could be inciting grief by kicking someone out of that position when he thought he was doing a good job but the person who got judged rose a vote and got him kicked out.. how is that right???
It might not be. But that is the judgement of the community. If the ex-Marshall believes he has been seriously wronged he can either take it to a neighboring settlement and make grievance, go into the wild and become a bandit himself, or possibly ally himself with an enemy or rival of that unjust settlement and seek satisfaction by other means.
...
some people wont give a...
And that is THEIR right.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Who do you propose should adjudicate any given case?thats the point.. its a game you dont have to adjucate if its automatic..
...
Every automatic judgement is a move away from sandbox and meaningful player interaction. There is enough of that, as you have reiterated. There is already the bounty system, the criminal flag (or was that something we only proposed?), and alignment (we think... less so if alignments cannot be changed).
The ability to lock up anyone you feel has slighted you in your own private dungeon for who knows how long is not a power I would wish you to have.
I also would not wish to have that power myself. I wouldn't mind being a Marshall tho... as long as I get to lead my deputies from behind...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
A citizen review will not work! Some people just don't care.. you have a whole nation of idiots 70 percent of which dont even freaking vote IRL and you expect them to take any interest in something as petty as "this guy isnt doing what I think is right".What do you propose should be your substitute for democracy in your settlement?
In a lot of cases thats going to be a matter of opinion.If it is the opinion of the majority then it is the opinion that counts.
not only that but you could be inciting grief by kicking someone out of that position when he thought he was doing a good job but the person who got judged rose a vote and got him kicked out.. how is that right???
It might not be. But that is the judgement of the community. If the ex-Marshall believes he has been seriously wronged he can either take it to a neighboring settlement and make grievance, go into the wild adnd become a bandit himself, or possibly ally himself with an enemy or rival of that unjust settlement and seek satisfaction by other means.
And that is THEIR right....
some people wont give a...you are really getting away from what this thread was about in the first place but if all you want to do is argue .. then find a different thread an i'll be glad to join you. But you think this idea is bunk because you deny yourself the oppurtunity to see what it could be.. You already know what ring I have thrown my hat into and obviously the same goes for you; so lets stop beating the dead horse here eh?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Who do you propose should adjudicate any given case?thats the point.. its a game you dont have to adjucate if its automatic..
...
Every automatic judgement is a move away from sandbox and meaningful player interaction. There is enough of that, as you have reiterated. There is already the bounty system, the criminal flag (or was that something we only proposed?), and alignment (we think... less so if alignments cannot be changed).
The ability to lock up anyone you feel has slighted you in your own private dungeon for who knows how long is not a power I would wish you to have.
I also would not wish to have that power myself. I wouldn't mind being a Marshall tho... as long as I get to lead my deputies from behind...
wow you really dont read do you.. contracts ... contracts... contracts.. you can only issue a bounty contract if someone kills you unlawfully. if thats too much power than you must be one of those guys that thinks he should have the porogitive to ruin the expierience for others for his own amusement .. killing another player unlawfully SHOULD warrant a reprecussion... otherwise its just like eve..
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
the more people you kick out of a kingdom the less of a kingdom you have..
If a kingdom begins running out of people then that kingdom should revisit its policies, should it not?
yes its a viable option but again that should be reserved for petty crimes.. kicking someone out of a kingdom (especially when thats all that character knows) could be seen as even worse than spending a bit of time in prison where you can still do stuff.. break out, organize, bribe, etc..
Especially if your crime was engineered against you, in the same manner as Goons or Brotherhood or whoever might engineer a situation. Then as Victim a player is in your dungeon... for how long? At whose discretion?
you advocate against the improsonment idea for specific reasons then propose somthing thats even worse ..
Worse than being held captive against your will?
I wonder about you..
Have I wronged you then? Want to lock me up personally?
Look Garric. This is supposed to be a sandbox game and I have high hopes for it. Asking for the game to do what is a player responsibiity is contrary to the sandbox design. Punishing players you believe have wronged you is something you would contract over at Tony's Totally Legitimate Bread making business.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
wow you really dont read do you..
I read rather well thank you. Write pretty well too.
contracts ... contracts... contracts.. you can only issue a bounty contract if someone kills you unlawfully. if thats too much power than you must be one of those guys that thinks he should have the porogitive to ruin the expierience for others for his own amusement .. killing another player unlawfully SHOULD warrant a reprecussion... otherwise its just like eve..
There are repercussions already built into the design. You don't get more options to game the system if I have anything to say about it (not that I do, but it sounded good), sorry.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
the more people you kick out of a kingdom the less of a kingdom you have..If a kingdom begins running out of people then that kingdom should revisit its policies, should it not?
yes its a viable option but again that should be reserved for petty crimes.. kicking someone out of a kingdom (especially when thats all that character knows) could be seen as even worse than spending a bit of time in prison where you can still do stuff.. break out, organize, bribe, etc..Especially if your crime was engineered against you, in the same manner as Goons or Brotherhood or whoever might engineer a situation. Then as Victim a player is in your dungeon... for how long? At whose discretion?
you advocate against the improsonment idea for specific reasons then propose somthing thats even worse ..Worse than being held captive against your will?
I wonder about you..Have I wronged you then? Want to lock me up personally?
Look Garric. This is supposed to be a sandbox game and I have high hopes for it. Asking for the game to do what is a player responsibiity is contrary to the sandbox design. Punishing players you believe have wronged you is something you would contract over at Tony's Totally Legitimate Bread making business.
I absolutely agree that players should be expected to resolve their own conflict.. I have agreeed with that from the very beginning, like you said it is a sandbox; the problem is when there are no checks against players being taken advantage of.
You seem to believe that this imprisonment system is permanent.. that if you do something wrong that you will be in prison forever.. the mechanic proposed is meant as both a deterent for unacceptable behavior and an IN GAME way to deal with unscrupulous characters. You kill someone and maybe your character spends a half hour in prison as per the descision of the one that created the bounty in the firstplace (a bounty for which you can only create if you have been killed by the character in question). I hate what the American judicial system has become; Good people are found guilty while those who commit inhuman atrocities walk our streets free of the law because our system thrives off of money... without certain protections against unlawful insurrectioun our society collapses into corruption and chaos.. those checks and balances must be upheld to ensure justice for each and every person within their own society.
Granted you have to take into account that there will be societies operating withing the game that will not follow any kind of nuetral good alignment or even a true nuetral alignment. but my guess will be that most evil societies won't have laws against such things as murder.
The idea of imprisonment in the way it is proposed here does nothing but further the interaction between players and create content for other players to enjoy.. players will be urged to come up with creative ideas to escape! they recieve a whole new motivation for playing and It adds a whole new dynamic to the game!
but you know I dont think your problem is with how imprisonment will work as much as it is with how the contract system works but as it stands that is somthing you will have to take up with GW because they have already set that fascet of the game in stone. The contract system is how players will be able to create content for others players, which I believe would be enhanced by an imprisonment system.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are two problems that I see with the capture mechanic other than the automation of what should be a player responibility and the lack of a limit to incarceration. It appears to presume the capturing player's alignment is going to be non-evil. To be fair and balanced evil players would also have to have the power to capture. Someone suggested evil might kidnap people who offended them. Well, if Good can capture evil players for being evil, shouldn't evil players be able to similarly capture good players for being good?
If not: where is Justice?
Second a situation could be engineered to trap somebody into killing you. Death is relatively trifling in this game, except that you then would be able to order captured the Victim you trapped, and then you could confine that player and torment him, so long as you didn't kill him. Where is the check and balance to that?
My conclusion so far is that this mechanic should definitely not be permitted. How do you see a solution to these issues? Do you even see them as issues?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are two problems that I see with the capture mechanic other than the automation of what should be a player responibility and the lack of a limit to incarceration. It appears to presume the capturing player's alignment is going to be non-evil. To be fair and balanced evil players would also have to have the power to capture. Someone suggested evil might kidnap people who offended them. Well, if Good can capture evil players for being evil, shouldn't evil players be able to similarly capture good players for being good?
If not: where is Justice?
Second a situation could be engineered to trap somebody into killing you. Death is relatively trifling in this game, except that you then would be able to order captured the Victim you trapped, and then you could confine that player and torment him, so long as you didn't kill him. Where is the check and balance to that?
My conclusion so far is that this mechanic should definitely not be permitted. How do you see a solution to these issues? Do you even see them as issues?
There are plenty of solutions but just to make sure I have the Itemized list of problems correct:
1) Time limit to incarceration
2) should evil characters be able to capture good characters.
3) what is there to keep players from being trapped into killing someone else and then getting flagged and captured.
4) would capture permit the torment of that character so long as the character was kept alive
So now that they have been identified here is a proposed solution:
1) Time limit to incarceration
Absolutely otherwise players could get to the point to where they get fed up with the game and ultimately leave.. I think this should be equivalent to the crime; however, perhaps just long enough to allow people to intereact meaningfully and not too long as to cause players to want to just quit.
2) should evil characters be able to capture good characters.
absolutely; but again, only if there has been some kind of conflct to prompt such a response.
3) what is there to keep players from being trapped into killing someone else and then getting flagged and captured.
I honestly cant think of a specific situation where this would occur; but ill try my hand at one.. trapped in a cage perhaps and the only way out is to attack the guy in front of you? dont attack him attack the cage maybe and make all cages destrucatble? maybe there will be times where people knowingly have to commit a crime to get themselves out of a jam in which case they would have still committed the crime and I think they should still pay the consequences.. again tho.. these instances of bounty should not occur for victomless crimes.. in truth I think these instances would be few and far between.
4) would capture permit the torment of that character so long as the character was kept alive.
Absolutely not! I would put a time limit on this as well as to ensure that players would not be allowed to hold a captive indefinately. perhaps an in game formula to decide the amount of time allotted to get the captured person back to the city where he took the bounty. the farther out you are from the bounty the more time you get.. even if it is only a couple more minutes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's a bad sign when I want to abandon a thread because the conversation has become so volatile I feel like I'm wading through insults to get to the points being made.
I'd like to say, I do not believe that imprisonment should be in the game because I want the 'bad guys' to be punished in a form worse than death. I do not want to steal player game-time, when frankly, being a murderer is a very valid way to play, that's why being Evil and/or Chaotic are options. For that matter, any character with sufficient impetus could - and should, perhaps - do murder.
Most of what I have said in this thread has actually been suggestions to prevent in-game imprisonment from being worse than death. And I will continue on that tack, because I believe both have a place.
To return to where the conversation was when I had to go to work; where the question that was asked was why we would need mechanics for something that can be roleplayed:
NPCs. If you have an option to submit to just law, you could turn yourself in for a crime, essentially by walking to a guarded area, and submitting to their authority, whereby you could be imprisoned rather than killed. - In order to allow this, you'd need a mechanic, obviously. - Their behavior could likely be set by the settlement as to whether or not they accept surrender, and be linked to alignment. I feel that a Lawful Good settlement would be far more likely to imprison criminals than simply kill them outright, at least for certain categories of crime.
So, I'd like to go through how I would like this system to work, assuming it were implemented.
1) A criminal may be tagged, as usual, and a bounty can be placed on their head. This bounty may be for capture, or for a kill - which of these options is chosen should have an affect on the alignment of the player creating the bounty, particularly if they have been issuing multiple bounties upon the same person for a single offense. (Vengeance and grudges are a bit inherently Evil, in my book.)
2) Upon finding the criminal, a bounty hunter may attack normally, or attack in a way that will allow submission - depending on his disposition, and the terms of his contract. (I would like to say that if the contract is for capture only, then killing the criminal can be punishable as murder - after all, he is not wanted dead, only penalized. It's a thought I have, though I'm uncertain about it. Perhaps another thing to be decided by the 'ruling' settlement.)
3) The criminal, upon being marked for capture, will be able to submit to the bounty hunter. However, if the player is entirely unwilling to be imprisoned, he may opt to refuse capture entirely, forcing the bounty hunter to either kill him or leave him be and attempt capture at a later date. Even if rendered unconscious with no way to fight back, the target of the capture may refuse to submit, essentially meaning that the attacker used too much force and killed him. Upon being processed at the prison, the bounty hunter is rewarded, and the bounty is considered fulfilled.
3a) The criminal may, rather than being caught by a bounty hunter, submit to any guard that attacks him which is capable of accepting a surrender. This would allow him to be taken into custody without a fight, if he visited any place with appropriate guards. If a criminal chooses this option, the bounty is automatically completed, and the reward goes to the funds of the prison - or rather, to the settlement that runs it.(To help prevent abuse of this, I would suggest that bounties for capture allow you to choose the prison the captive is to be taken to, just as you can choose who may hunt for your bounties. (A higher bounty being required for a higher security prison.) This would prevent him from going back to his own settlement and surrendering himself, and being able to effectively gain the money from the bounty himself.)
4) The criminal may attempt escape at any time while en route to the destination prison, and he may also attempt escape after having been imprisoned. Depending on the security of the jail-wagon and the security of the jail, he may begin with having had only his weapons taken away, or may be stripped down to as little as his small-clothes. Again depending upon the security of his prison (and upon his own skill, of course) he may or may not be successful at re-acquiring this gear while attempting escape.
5) If the criminal escapes prison, the bounty on him is automatically renewed on him, at no cost to the original party offering the bounty.
6) If the criminal serves his time in prison fully, he is given back his possessions in full, and the mark of Criminal is removed from him, allowing him to function as a reformed member of society, with no restrictions on fast travel or otherwise. However, the original victim of the bounty will still be able to offer bounties. (I believe that multiple bounties upon the same individual should have escalating cost, and increasing influence upon your alignment.)
7) The required jail-time would start fairly small, however each time the criminal tag is acquired, the required time of imprisonment in order to cleanse it is increased - this would not prevent someone from returning to crime entirely, perhaps, but the scaling punishment should be a powerful deterrent from leading a life of crime.
There is the flip-side of this coin, which I suppose we can say is abduction and holding someone for ransom - this would function similarly, however, without the criminal tag to have cleansed by allowing yourself to be imprisoned, there is very little reason for a character to choose to submit, other than a desire not to lose unthreaded items, pride, and/or a belief that they will be able to escape or be rescued.
I hope that was coherent enough for everyone, and I hope that we can all see what I am going for with this.
Editing for clarity:
Yes, I am implying in this post that once you have acquired the tag of 'criminal', you will be unable to lose it unless you serve an amount of time imprisoned. Even if someone puts repeated bounties out for your head, you will remain branded a criminal until you serve time. You don't HAVE to do it, but it will certainly make your life easier being able to walk around freely again.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The multiple bounties for the same murder is not right. One murder, one bounty. Similarly multiple criminal flags would be cumulative, such that if a character goes on a rampage killing multiple characters each of those characters can apply a single flag and no more, but the murderer remains a criminal until each of those flags is neutralized.
I haven't finished digesting the proposed solutions to 'capture' issues, so will reserve my findings for later. I have a different post to make proposing political tools in-game that have been suggested in this conversation first.