Maybe only members of the dead guy's group can move the husks. If the guards are in a CC, they'll be able to transport them.
Which, incidentally, I really love just because it might lead to some funny awkward moments if there's a necromancer known to buy corpses in the area. ;D
(that assumes necromancy is benefited by the presence of actual corpses, of course)
Goblin Squad Member
|
Speaking for myself and not anyone else. I look forward to turning down every SAD. I don't see why I should pay. I will take the loss in material as the cost of doing business. I will get death curse and bounty rights on anyone involved in an attack on my gatherer twin and I will take advantage of it. Just another cost of doing business. In Eve bounties were worthless here with a death curse and the ability to offer the bounty to whom I choose I will get my vengeance. Tony is gonna love me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Speaking for myself and not anyone else. I look forward to turning down every SAD. I don't see why I should pay. I will take the loss in material as the cost of doing business. I will get death curse and bounty rights on anyone involved in an attack on my gatherer twin and I will take advantage of it. Just another cost of doing business. In Eve bounties were worthless here with a death curse and the ability to offer the bounty to whom I choose I will get my vengeance. Tony is gonna love me.
Whenever you're killed and that killer shows up in your enemies list (you were attacked and weren't fair game)
I wouldn't expect to be able to bounty or death curse if you turn down an SAD.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
All groups that had applied a Stand and Deliver previously take a reputation hit, and a message about who horned in on their territory.
This kind of penalty to the prior Fleecers has been proposed a few times, but it is just as open to abuse as the original version. Instead of having alts levy the "penny fleecing" at the start of a journey, instead travellers will use alts at the end of their journey to punish retroactively anyone who fleeced them along the way. Instead of losing reputation up front for attacking a pre-fleeced target, bandits will lose reputation after the fact.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't expect to be able to bounty or death curse if you turn down an SAD.
Why not? Bandits get to attack you without a rep hit if you turn them down (like they're doing you some kind of favour by robbing you...), but they still get an Attacker flag (and presumably a Criminal one if there's laws).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Speaking for myself and not anyone else. I look forward to turning down every SAD. I don't see why I should pay. I will take the loss in material as the cost of doing business. I will get death curse and bounty rights on anyone involved in an attack on my gatherer twin and I will take advantage of it. Just another cost of doing business. In Eve bounties were worthless here with a death curse and the ability to offer the bounty to whom I choose I will get my vengeance. Tony is gonna love me.
Whenever you're killed and that killer shows up in your enemies list (you were attacked and weren't fair game)I wouldn't expect to be able to bounty or death curse if you turn down an SAD.
Turning on the Bandit flag does not mean you get to kill at will. You still get the criminal and attacker flag. This makes you eligible for my vengeance. To me that means death curse and bounties for as many times as I have money or reputation to spend on it. They let me do it more than once and I will.
"Don't take is personal. It's only business."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's the 'fair game' line I'm pointing out. To me, declining a SAD makes you 'fair game', and your killer doesn't get put on the enemies list, therefore you can't put out a bounty or death curse.
We don't have a solid answer on if a outlaw can have bounties put against their SAD refusals. I'm just speculating based on what has been said.
All groups that had applied a Stand and Deliver previously take a reputation hit, and a message about who horned in on their territory.This kind of penalty to the prior Fleecers has been proposed a few times, but it is just as open to abuse as the original version. Instead of having alts levy the "penny fleecing" at the start of a journey, instead travellers will use alts at the end of their journey to punish retroactively anyone who fleeced them along the way. Instead of losing reputation up front for attacking a pre-fleeced target, bandits will lose reputation after the fact.
To be fair, its abuse isn't quite as bad--it doesn't stop the merchant from getting robbed, it just basically removes the benefit of SAD.
Which is still bad, so I'm gonna lean in favor of having the Fleeced flag just be a cosmetic matter. Perhaps the established bandits of a hex run across a merchant who's been robbed, and leave him alone in exchange for directions to the guy horning in on their territory.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's the 'fair game' line I'm pointing out. To me, declining a SAD makes you 'fair game', and your killer doesn't get put on the enemies list, therefore you can't put out a bounty or death curse.
We don't have a solid answer on if a outlaw can have bounties put against their SAD refusals. I'm just speculating based on what has been said.
I believe you are correct, but I can't pull up the quotes with this damned iPhone.
@ Ludy,
You seem to be taking it personally, but no matter. The bounty system has already received enough backlash to make the original idea of limitless bounties ruled out. On top of that, there is also something like a 24 hour timer set on that bounty.
However your more obvious misconception is that bandits will be operating within settled hexes with laws. As long bandits keep there activities to lawless hexes, you will not get bounty rights or death curse opportunities.
But even with bounties and death curses, it will be pretty easy to avoid the collection of such things. Destiny's Twins is a beautiful thing, and so is real time training. Then even if you manage to kill a bandit like me or any in my company, it will cost you in both gold and reputation, probably much more than you would have lost in a SAD to begin with.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All groups that had applied a Stand and Deliver previously take a reputation hit, and a message about who horned in on their territory.This kind of penalty to the prior Fleecers has been proposed a few times, but it is just as open to abuse as the original version. Instead of having alts levy the "penny fleecing" at the start of a journey, instead travellers will use alts at the end of their journey to punish retroactively anyone who fleeced them along the way. Instead of losing reputation up front for attacking a pre-fleeced target, bandits will lose reputation after the fact.
Good point, I had not thought of that. Back to the drawing board...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But even with bounties and death curses, it will be pretty easy to avoid the collection of such things. Destiny's Twins is a beautiful thing, and so is real time training. Then even if you manage to kill a bandit like me or any in my company, it will cost you in both gold and reputation, probably much more than you would have lost in a SAD to begin with.
It is important not to milk it too much.
A lot of crafter/merchant players will not be happy with either of those option if it occurs to often. If banditry is too successful in their region that type of player will simply go play something else and there will eventually be no crafted goods to steal.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But even with bounties and death curses, it will be pretty easy to avoid the collection of such things. Destiny's Twins is a beautiful thing, and so is real time training. Then even if you manage to kill a bandit like me or any in my company, it will cost you in both gold and reputation, probably much more than you would have lost in a SAD to begin with.
Lost goods: 1000gp. Lost time: 2 hours. Making a bandit log out and play an alt because he's too scared to deal with death curses: Priceless.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But even with bounties and death curses, it will be pretty easy to avoid the collection of such things. Destiny's Twins is a beautiful thing, and so is real time training. Then even if you manage to kill a bandit like me or any in my company, it will cost you in both gold and reputation, probably much more than you would have lost in a SAD to begin with.Lost goods: 1000gp. Lost time: 2 hours. Making a bandit log out and play an alt because he's too scared to deal with death curses: Priceless.
Gained goods: 1000gp. Lost time: 10 minutes. Seeing a person rage because you logged onto your identical destinies twin character nullifying their bounties and curses: Priceless.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Gained goods: 1000gp. Lost time: 10 minutes. Seeing a person rage because you logged onto your identical destinies twin character nullifying their bounties and curses: Priceless.But even with bounties and death curses, it will be pretty easy to avoid the collection of such things. Destiny's Twins is a beautiful thing, and so is real time training. Then even if you manage to kill a bandit like me or any in my company, it will cost you in both gold and reputation, probably much more than you would have lost in a SAD to begin with.Lost goods: 1000gp. Lost time: 2 hours. Making a bandit log out and play an alt because he's too scared to deal with death curses: Priceless.
Do it twice? :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My point is that bounties and likely death curses will not be the deterrent that some may think. As others have said, bounties in EvE are a joke. As a matter of fact, criminal flags have been a joke as well. I have been running around with a suspect or criminal flag for weeks, continuously looting wrecks and I have been locked onto only once.
Miners in EvE have learned to just let ore thieves and ninja looters take what we will. It is not worth the time or risk for them. I expect that the same thing will happen in PFO
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's the 'fair game' line I'm pointing out. To me, declining a SAD makes you 'fair game', and your killer doesn't get put on the enemies list, therefore you can't put out a bounty or death curse.
We don't have a solid answer on if a outlaw can have bounties put against their SAD refusals. I'm just speculating based on what has been said.
I believe you are correct, but I can't pull up the quotes with this damned iPhone.
@ Ludy,
You seem to be taking it personally, but no matter. The bounty system has already received enough backlash to make the original idea of limitless bounties ruled out. On top of that, there is also something like a 24 hour timer set on that bounty.
However your more obvious misconception is that bandits will be operating within settled hexes with laws. As long bandits keep there activities to lawless hexes, you will not get bounty rights or death curse opportunities.
But even with bounties and death curses, it will be pretty easy to avoid the collection of such things. Destiny's Twins is a beautiful thing, and so is real time training. Then even if you manage to kill a bandit like me or any in my company, it will cost you in both gold and reputation, probably much more than you would have lost in a SAD to begin with.
Let me get this right you think you should b able to force others to pay you money, not lose rep, not get death curse, not get bounties and be on your marry way? I agree that if the merchant agrees and pays you should not get any, but if they decline your generous offer than you need to attack. They did not start the conflict you did. Therefore you get all the negatives except the lose of reputation.
Also the bit of "But even with bounties and death curses, it will be pretty easy to avoid the collection of such things. Destiny's Twins is a beautiful thing, and so is real time training. Then even if you manage to kill a bandit like me or any in my company, it will cost you in both gold and reputation, probably much more than you would have lost in a SAD to begin with." you are basically admitting attempting to circumvent repercussions of your actions. For such a stand up guy you really seem to be trying to prevent anything bad happening to bandits. I will be willing to lose the gold and reputation but you seem to really want to avoid anything even close to a fair fight or repercussions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Let me get this right you think you should b able to force others to pay you money, not lose rep, not get death curse, not get bounties and be on your marry way?
You seem to be missing the location I've mentioned twice...
As long bandits keep there activities to lawless hexes, you will not get bounty rights or death curse opportunities.
So, to answer your question... "yes" if I stay in the lawless zone and you do not accept the SAD, I will not receive any kind of flag, other than attacker (which lasts 1 minutes). I will have no penalty to alignment or rep, because it is in lawless land. I will however gain max reputation boost for the day if you do accept it.
Remember also, in the lawless land I will not take a Reputation hit if I just attack and kill you all. Offering a SAD in lawless land is more a favor to you.
I'm so curious how this is all going to work in-game. I can see it being a very simple system, or one that is very complex.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It might help your case, Bluddwolf, if you stopped acting so cheerful about the advantages your company will have. If you're just pointing them out to help balance things, that's great, but as-is, I think your tendency to bring up how successful your identity-confused consortium will be is just aggravating the merchants in the crowd. This is me speaking as a merchant guard (i.e. one of the guys you say will be useless).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Attacker
The character has attacked another character outside of a war situation, and the target character did not have a PvP flag. It denotes which character is the aggressor in PvP combat.Anyone killing a character with Attacker does not suffer reputation or alignment loss.
Attacker is removed if the character is killed.
The Attacker flag lasts for one minute after combat ends.
If the character gets the Attacker flag he gets an Aggressor buff that lasts for 24 hours that has no effect besides being a counter. Each time he gets Attacker increases the stack of Aggressor by one.
If the character gets a high enough stack of Aggressor, determined by his Reputation, he gets the status Murderer, which lasts 24 hours and does not disappear on death. It acts the same as Attacker, allowing repeat offenders to be hunted down for longer periods of time.
Nothing about lawless area.
Outlaw (Chaotic)
The Outlaw flag is for players who want to rob other players, commit acts of banditry, etc. It can be used by chaotic evil players to be brigands, or by chaotic good players to be Robin Hood–style robbers. Outlaws use a new mechanic we are working on developing called stand and deliver, which allows the Outlaw to demand money from their victim through a trade window. If the victim refuses, the Outlaw gets to carry out his threats of force without losing reputation.This flag cannot be disabled while Attacker, Criminal, or Heinous (or their 24-hour versions) are active.
While Outlaw is active:
The player gets more loot when searching PvP kills that goes up each hour up to ten hours.
The player gets a bonus to Stealth that goes up each hour up to ten hours.
These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade within five minutes of the attack.
If the victim was offered and rejected stand and deliver, the Outlaw loses no reputation for killing the target within five minutes of the rejection.
If the victim and Outlaw completed a stand-and-deliver trade, the Outlaw loses double reputation for killing the target within 20 minutes. (If they pay, you should let them go.)
When an Outlaw receives a ransom from stand and deliver, they get reputation up to a daily max.
Yep you are going to get flagged. True your bonuses won't drop after a SAD but you are still a killer and still an attacker.
Any player that hurts you shows up on your enemies list. This list allows you to salute or rebuke the enemy (granting or reducing reputation, at the cost of your own). The entry disappears if you aren't hurt by that enemy again within several days (exact time frame to be determined). If you died within a certain window (also TBD) after someone's entry was refreshed on your enemies list, that person is noted on the list as one of your killers (those who injured you right before you died may be a bigger factor in your death than whoever made the final blow). If you want to get even, you can establish a bounty on anyone listed as a killer on your enemies list.
Hmm seems like I can put a bounty on anyone who kills me. Even if I am the aggressor so bandits can put it on guards that kill them. Or a rish merchant can give cash to his guards to have multiple bounties out.
Whenever you're killed and that killer shows up in your enemies list (you were attacked and weren't fair game), upon resurrecting, you are immediately able to pray to Calistria, goddess of vengeance, to bring a death curse upon your murderer. You can only have one active death curse at a time; it only lasts 24 hours unless renewed, and it costs you reputation to enact and renew. The reputation cost is proportional to the reputation of your killer, and increases over time. The target will not know when the curse is placed, but will be able to tell when someone is about to carry out the curse (likely with a very threatening death's head icon over any player involved).
Death curse is expensive but unless your target is a wimp it is likely that you can get it done. Even more so since you can trade reputation like a currency. If your rich you can get your revenge on the bandit even in lawless areas. Hmm maybe sheep will have teeth.
I happen to have spent a large chunk of my life dealing with a deranged ram, who managed to make that chunk of life very miserable, and I'm here to say that sheep don't need teeth. They have horns.
;P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Kobold I think you get it. Lately I see far to much "protect the bandit" or "protect evil". Seems that many who want these play styles are unwilling to take any risks. They want to the ability to gank but don't want anything in game that might be a negative to them.
How about the idea that GW wants to make the game fun for both sides? If bandits can force payment, not take reputation hits, not have bounties, not have any flags, always get the first attack, and can go into any city they want... WTF play anything else?
Bring some realism in expectations back to the argument. I like SAD. I just think that some are trying to grab for far to much in this argument and it will negatively effect the game if one side gets everything.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Kobold I think you get it. Lately I see far to much "protect the bandit" or "protect evil". Seems that many who want these play styles are unwilling to take any risks. They want to the ability to gank but don't want anything in game that might be a negative to them.
How about the idea that GW wants to make the game fun for both sides? If bandits can force payment, not take reputation hits, not have bounties, not have any flags, always get the first attack, and can go into any city they want... WTF play anything else?
Bring some realism in expectations back to the argument. I like SAD. I just think that some are trying to grab for far to much in this argument and it will negatively effect the game if one side gets everything.
+1
To some extent the demands of SOME of the evil/chaotic/bandit side are getting ridiculous. For example complaining because they cannot parade down the main street of town trailing a posse of undead with immunity or wanting to be able to automatically stop every target they meet on the road without the target having the option to try and run.
Not all would be bandits are unreasonable of course.
Also some of the more self righteous Good players are just as ludicrous demanding the right to kill any Evil aligned PC on sight for no reason other than being evil.
Hopefully reason and balance will prevail.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Kobold I think you get it. Lately I see far to much "protect the bandit" or "protect evil". Seems that many who want these play styles are unwilling to take any risks. They want to the ability to gank but don't want anything in game that might be a negative to them.
How about the idea that GW wants to make the game fun for both sides? If bandits can force payment, not take reputation hits, not have bounties, not have any flags, always get the first attack, and can go into any city they want... WTF play anything else?
Bring some realism in expectations back to the argument. I like SAD. I just think that some are trying to grab for far to much in this argument and it will negatively effect the game if one side gets everything.
+1
To some extent the demands of SOME of the evil/chaotic/bandit side are getting ridiculous. For example complaining because they cannot parade down the main street of town trailing a posse of undead with immunity or wanting to be able to automatically stop every target they meet on the road without the target having the option to try and run.
Not all would be bandits are unreasonable of course.
Also some of the more self righteous Good players are just as ludicrous demanding the right to kill any Evil aligned PC on sight for no reason other than being evil.
Hopefully reason and balance will prevail.
Fully agree. I have nothing against bandits as they will drive up prices on material making it easier to make more money.
I have nothing against the goody-goody as they are needed to have interesting wars.
It's just going a bit far in the demands that different groups are making.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I certainly have nothing against bandits--without them, I'm going to be reduced to just wandering around and defending myself from crazed PKers and the occasional monster. I need a goal in my wandering, and protecting merchants provides one. It lets me be lost productively. ;D
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will have no penalty to alignment or rep, because it is in lawless land.
I imagine you'll still be taking a hit on the good-evil axis, even if there's no laws.
Remember also, in the lawless land I will not take a Reputation hit if I just attack and kill you all.
And you'll still take a reputation hit no matter where you attack someone. Lawless just means you won't take a law-chaos hit, and won't get a Criminal flag.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just as a reminder:
[qoute]In uncontrolled territory, no player settlement is present in the hex. Murder does not apply the Criminal flag, but attacking an unflagged target still applies the Attacker flag (and flags from other sources persist until they expire naturally). Help is also potentially very far away. A player killer here is likely to be free of the Attacker flag before anyone else shows up. These areas also tend to have the rarest resources, encouraging players to take their chances against bandits in the woods.
In these open pvp zones there is no flag other than attacker, unless you enter with a flag already. There is no murder, because there is no law. If there is. O murder, there is no criminal flag. No criminal flag, no alignment shift.
This area is ideally reserved for the risk takers, both resource gatherers and bandits alike. To say that bandits are not looking to take risk is not mindful of the fact that most of what we do will be in this open PvP zone.
As for wanting advantages in the SAD situation, again this function has us give up the advantage of surprise. While negotiating, we are giving up valuable time, which may provide the merchant the opportunity to gather reenforcements. In exchange for the SAD, bandits give up taking all of the loot and get a reputation boost. In exchange for accepting the SAD the merchant gets to keep some of his loot and receives safe passage from the moment, and likely from that bandit group for the 20 minutes after the SAD.
It would make no sense for a bandit to accept a SAD and then later kill that same merchant for the rest of their loot, and receive a double reputation hit. The bandit would have just killed the merchant the first time for all of the loot and a normal reputation adjustment, based on the location of course.
Again, this thread is not about getting some advantage that bandits did not have. It is about preventing the misuse of the SAD system by merchants to protect themselves from the bandits getting the one benefit we do receive from the SAD system.
I have no doubt that whatever system eventually gets put in place, merchants will still have a slight advantage in getting more money out of these interactions than the bandits. We are only a stop gap to the unfettered resource gathering and market flood of those resources. This will reduce the supply of those resources, raising your profits.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just because an area is lawless doesn't mean you won't get the same shifting. There is no difference in losing reputation/alignment in the wild as there is in the city. The difference is, that out in territory with no murder laws, you don't get a criminal flag.
We all though that 'lawless' was synonymous with 'no penalties' but we turned out to be wrong.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The only things you don't get is the criminal flag and reputation hits IF you are using SAD in a lawless area.
You still get attacker, not that it matters much because of the time limits. I think even putting a SAD up is an aggressive act so you should get flagged if you physically attack or not.
You still get hit with good/evil ups and downs if you kill. Karma is not going to care if your in the lawless lands same as it won't care if a paladin kills you.
The benefit of stand and deliver is providing you ways to prevent loss of reputation. I like that aspect of it. I think that if a brigand is honorable and follows his side of the agreement than they should not get hit by reputation loss.
Just because you are in a lawless area and use SAD does not mean you are going to be safe. If you kill you started it and you will be on the victims killer list. Bounties and Death Curse are the option of the victim. If they have money and or reputation to burn accept it as the price of your actions. Your victim needs to accept the risks of being attacked why should the bandit not have risks?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Ludy,
Attacking and killing in the lawless lands will give only chaotic shift, not evil, as per Ryan Dancey's description that evil shift is attached to murder and or criminal flag.
This is the same system that governs 0.0 space in EvE . You do not get security status hit for kills. The attacker flag means nothing in this zone because everyone is already PvP enabled.
As for me not wanting bounties of curses, I did not say I did not want them, I said they are a joke and only add cost to the person issuing them.
I personally don't care about getting killed in pvp, as long as at the end of the day I walk away with more gold than I started, it was a successful day.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Frankly if they could build a system that approached the capacity of judgement of a good quality GM, I'd have probably not bothered to object...
How is it you imagine they cannot to some extent model what approaches the judgement of a 'good' GM?
It is almost certain that these alignment/reputation systems are derived from the judgement of at least one, probably more 'good' GMs, where 'good' evaluates to Paizo in-house game masters.
Business analysts would present the situation in context and request the GM's judgement. That judgement would then be analysed into its process components: how did the GM derive his or her outcome? Those processes surely resulted in the complex of alignment/reputation elements and the metrics by which they could be usefully measured in a computer system.
We know they have access to good Paizo GMs and consult closely with them. Those GMs can deliver their verdict, however, without having to worry about a player who wants a favorable outcome derailing a live game with extended argumentation with a self-interested player.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Ludy,
Attacking and killing in the lawless lands will give only chaotic shift, not evil, as per Ryan Dancey's description that evil shift is attached to murder and or criminal flag.
This is the same system that governs 0.0 space in EvE . You do not get security status hit for kills. The attacker flag means nothing in this zone because everyone is already PvP enabled.
As for me not wanting bounties of curses, I did not say I did not want them, I said they are a joke and only add cost to the person issuing them.
I personally don't care about getting killed in pvp, as long as at the end of the day I walk away with more gold than I started, it was a successful day.
Ryan has said on numerous occasions that killing is always an evil act when the target is not flagged otherwise. You can kill all the champions, assassins, travelers and enforcers you want, as an outlaw, but if you kill someone that does not have one of these flags, or a short term pvp flag, you will shift evil and lose reputation no matter where you are in the world.
The chaotic lawful axis is tied to local laws, and when you are outside in the wild, it is unlikely you will shift very chaotic. It is more about breaking laws than killing players.
I suggest reading through this again:
Lastly, good vs. evil raises and lowers based on interactions with PvE content and PvP content. Here we can get into some murkier questions of morality than law vs. chaos or reputation, but we have to remember that the sheep and the wolf both must have fun if we want the game to succeed, the community to thrive, etc. Thus we have to view alignments not as absolutes, even in terms of good and evil. To give you an example, our interpretation of lawful good and paladins is that paladins do not have carte blanche to murder anyone they detect as evil. For all they know, that person could be working on atonement right at that moment. Killing is by nature a non-good action, but that does not mean it is not sometimes a necessary action or that all killings are equally punished. Indeed, a paladin who murders a peasant for no good reason will find himself quickly bereft of his powers, while one who kills a group of bandits is likely to need to perform some other good deeds to unburden his soul from the stain of blood upon it. Effectively, paladins have to go to confession eventually, or perform some comparable act. Any paladin who is prideful enough to settle all questions of morality with a sword is really not much of a paladin, or at least won't be for long. But demons, supernatural evil, and people with the Heinous flag are totally evil and you should kill them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Valkenr
Everyone is flagged in the lawless wilderness. I don't know how else to explain it? Much of what I'm talking about with bandits is based on operating mostly in the open pvp zones.
In the open pvp zones there are only two consequences, death and looting. The attacker flag has no real consequence because the zone automatically enables pvp anyway.
At least one of the Devs has also mentioned that they are discussing the removal of the attacker flag, because it is really useless anyway. They have not fleshed out what that means or where it might apply.
You can take all of what has been said from the Devs and infer that the act of stealing in any zone where it is not a crime, is neutral. Murder is not an evil act in the open pvp zone, it is lawless and murder is a violation of law, it is not simply killing.
The Sevs do not want to limit pvp in anyway in the open pvp zone because they want to encourage pvp to remain away from settlements when done outside of wars. This may also be why they have said that wars are currently only the affairs of settlements and not individual companies or players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From the Screaming for Vengeance Blog:
•You slip toward chaotic whenever you gain the Attacker or Criminal flags, except when pursuing a bounty (see below). This is generally a flat amount of loss.
•You slip toward evil whenever you kill someone while you have the Attacker flag or gain the Heinous flag. For killing, you move less if the target was also evil (in other words, it's more evil to kill a good character).
Sorry Bludd, you're confused. Even in the wilderness you get the Attacker flag.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Rep in PFO will just be another trade-able commodity like gold or ore. I have no idea why you guys are so worried about.
Is that actually confirmed, or pretty much conjecture?
I assume IronVanguard's question is in response to Neadenil Edam's assertion.
Yes, in essence.
From Screaming for Vengeance:
Any player that hurts you shows up on your enemies list. This list allows you to salute or rebuke the enemy (granting or reducing reputation, at the cost of your own).
--------------------------------
Whenever you're killed and that killer shows up in your enemies list (you were attacked and weren't fair game)I wouldn't expect to be able to bounty or death curse if you turn down an SAD.
I would. In context, "fair game" meant you had a flag. I don't believe refusing a Stand-and-Deliver offer is intended to function like getting a Flag.
It would be nice to get a developer clarification, though.
--------------------------------
I've heard nothing, that I recall, saying bounties and death curses don't work in lawless areas.
I've repeatedly pointed out that they will apply even in lawless (wilderness) areas.
Question on Murder and "lawful territory"
Does killing another player in the wilderness give me the Criminal Flag?
--------------------------------
Hmm seems like I can put a bounty on anyone who kills me. Even if I am the aggressor so bandits can put it on guards that kill them.
If you're the aggressor - and they weren't flagged - you'll get the Attacker Flag, which means you are "fair game" if they kill you, which means you won't be able to issue a Bounty or a Death Curse.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's the 'fair game' line I'm pointing out. To me, declining a SAD makes you 'fair game', and your killer doesn't get put on the enemies list, therefore you can't put out a bounty or death curse.
We don't have a solid answer on if a outlaw can have bounties put against their SAD refusals. I'm just speculating based on what has been said.
I believe you are correct, but I can't pull up the quotes with this damned iPhone.
@ Ludy,
You seem to be taking it personally, but no matter. The bounty system has already received enough backlash to make the original idea of limitless bounties ruled out. On top of that, there is also something like a 24 hour timer set on that bounty.
However your more obvious misconception is that bandits will be operating within settled hexes with laws. As long bandits keep there activities to lawless hexes, you will not get bounty rights or death curse opportunities.
But even with bounties and death curses, it will be pretty easy to avoid the collection of such things. Destiny's Twins is a beautiful thing, and so is real time training. Then even if you manage to kill a bandit like me or any in my company, it will cost you in both gold and reputation, probably much more than you would have lost in a SAD to begin with.
I believe you can only offer SAD if you are flagged <OUTLAW> which is a PvP flag meaning you are open to attack by anyone. Which kinda makes bounties somewhat redundant. I also think they are putting in a cooldown (game time not real time) for all PvP flags so that you can't just remove it instantly whenever you want. It would be too abusive otherwise (and I'm speaking for all PvP flags, including Champion which I intend to use). So effectively bandits are "fair game" while operating in "Outlaw" mode. That's kinda the point behind the PvP flags...it gives people more leeway in initiating PvP against unwilling targets in exchange for greater vulnerability in having PvP initiated against them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
All groups that had applied a Stand and Deliver previously take a reputation hit, and a message about who horned in on their territory.This kind of penalty to the prior Fleecers has been proposed a few times, but it is just as open to abuse as the original version. Instead of having alts levy the "penny fleecing" at the start of a journey, instead travellers will use alts at the end of their journey to punish retroactively anyone who fleeced them along the way. Instead of losing reputation up front for attacking a pre-fleeced target, bandits will lose reputation after the fact.
Clearly there has to be a limitation to how long the "fleeced" flag lasts so that any later bandits have to do it in the near vicinity of the origional bandits...which opens up the ALT to getting SAD'd or killed by said origional bandits themselves. Also the REP penalty should apply on DEATH of the "fleeced" target...not just SAD attempt.
So if the "fleeced" merchant uses an ALT to get themselves killed to apply some sort of Rep penalty to the origional bandits...then they also get husked...which means potential item loss of unthreaded items...if the merchant hands his inventory to the Alt..then that ALT is open to getting SAD'ed without penalty themselves...and is sitting around with the <OUTLAW> PvP flag which makes them fair game to anyone who comes along.
The "fleeced" flag should just be a LIMITED immunity in time/space to make sure the merchant doesn't get rapid fire SAD'ed by the same bandit group who just circumvent the SAD mechanichism by not being mechanicaly GROUPED together. THAT is the exploit on the bandit side. Example: You and your 4 buddies are working together as bandits. You are standing 5 ft apart. You see a merchant approaching...you drop GROUP (or maybe you never GROUPED in the first place). Your first buddy walks up and SAD's the merchant...it's a reasonable price...so the merchant agrees. The rest of you join GROUP and SAD the merchant again...asking an exhorbinant sum...the merchant refuses and you get to kill and loot him without consequence because he refused an SAD. What's really supposed to happen in that situation, according to the spirit of the rules is that you guys get a double rep hit for reneging on a deal and then killing the guy after he's already paid. What actualy happens is that you get to circumvent the rules and extort the guy and then double cross the guy and kill him with no rep loss or consequences....because you've used a simple mechanic to fool the system into thinking you are not working together when you are....and you get a double pay day. That's an exploit...and it's why having something like a "fleeced" flag is important... the "fleeced" flag shouldn't be a carte blanche for the merchant for his whole trip...but it should protect him for a little space of time and territory...long enough to get away from you guys. Your only responsibility then as bandits is that there is no one else (including the merchants ALT) that is operating in your IMMEDIATE vacinity that can mess up your deal...that SHOULD be easly doable for you to do. That prevents exploits by EITHER side.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gained goods: 1000gp. Lost time: 10 minutes. Seeing a person rage because you logged onto your identical destinies twin character nullifying their bounties and curses: Priceless.But even with bounties and death curses, it will be pretty easy to avoid the collection of such things. Destiny's Twins is a beautiful thing, and so is real time training. Then even if you manage to kill a bandit like me or any in my company, it will cost you in both gold and reputation, probably much more than you would have lost in a SAD to begin with.Lost goods: 1000gp. Lost time: 2 hours. Making a bandit log out and play an alt because he's too scared to deal with death curses: Priceless.
Just a point of clarification...bounties are nullified by logging out...death curses aren't. You take the rep hit from them whether you are logged in or not...and I believe your vulnerability with threaded items is expressed in game time not real time....otherwise it would be too simple to circumvent (i.e. exlpoit) the intent of the mechanic.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My point is that bounties and likely death curses will not be the deterrent that some may think. As others have said, bounties in EvE are a joke. As a matter of fact, criminal flags have been a joke as well. I have been running around with a suspect or criminal flag for weeks, continuously looting wrecks and I have been locked onto only once.
Miners in EvE have learned to just let ore thieves and ninja looters take what we will. It is not worth the time or risk for them. I expect that the same thing will happen in PFO
Bounties maybe not, but Death Curses seem a pretty reasonable deterrent from going too crazy on killing people who aren't legitimate targets.
Each Death Curse you take a direct Rep hit, the victem pays some Rep as well...but looking at the math. Say a victem pays 50 rep per curse and you get hit with 100. Say you kill 50 people, each victem only takes a pretty minor ding of 50 points to thier rep...but you take 50 x 100 = 5,000 rep...that drops your rep right down into the cellar. We don't know the details but GW has maintained a pretty consistant stance that rep has a major effect on access to quality training facilities...so that's not an inconsiderable ding. Plus you probably won't have any threaded items...and no matter how good you are, you are going to suffer a death in PvP occasionaly.
Taken together that sounds like a reasonable ding for someone getting Death Curses on a frequent basis.
I know people inevitably make EvE comparisons as it's really the only other thing out there...but I wouldn't take that too far. This game is NOT EvE, it's mechanics are not going to be the same as EvE's and the Dev's have made it pretty clear that while there will be some similarties in some areas...this isn't going to be EvE with Elves. So expecting everything to be just like EvE, I think is not going to be very reliable.
Edit: Also Bludd, it spells out very clearly in "Screaming For Vengence" that killing someone while you are flagged as an Attacker gives you an Evil shift. Characters are NOT automaticaly flagged for entering a "lawless zone". Characters may voluntarly put on a long term PvP flag (Champion, Outlaw, Enforcer, Assasin, Traveler) which makes them fair game to attack (i.e. no Attacker flag for initiating combat with them) but a person without those flags will still get you an "Attacker" flag if you go after them...and will still get you an Evil shift for killing them unless explicitly called out in the PvP Flag description.
Example - For Champions we (as is explicitly stated) don't suffer Alignment shifts for killing Evil characters...but still suffer shifts (pretty hefty ones) for killing Good/Neutral ones. We still suffer reputation shifts for killing any unflagged character regardless of Alignment.
Outlaw explicity states you avoid Rep shifts for killing targets that you have SAD'ed. Doesn't say anything about alignment hits...so I assume those are still in place. The only thing that lawless area gets you is avoiding the CRIMINAL flag.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Frankly if they could build a system that approached the capacity of judgement of a good quality GM, I'd have probably not bothered to object...How is it you imagine they cannot to some extent model what approaches the judgement of a 'good' GM?
It is almost certain that these alignment/reputation systems are derived from the judgement of at least one, probably more 'good' GMs, where 'good' evaluates to Paizo in-house game masters.
Business analysts would present the situation in context and request the GM's judgement. That judgement would then be analysed into its process components: how did the GM derive his or her outcome? Those processes surely resulted in the complex of alignment/reputation elements and the metrics by which they could be usefully measured in a computer system.
We know they have access to good Paizo GMs and consult closely with them. Those GMs can deliver their verdict, however, without having to worry about a player who wants a favorable outcome derailing a live game with extended argumentation with a self-interested player.
Because it's an automated system and automated systems still have VERY limited ability to judge human interaction. Even if they were putting "Big Blue" and it's A.I. to the task it would still have a very difficult adjucating many of the things that seem trivialy intuitive to human minds...and we know that they aren't going to expend the resources of building THAT level of A.I. into an alignment system. What we are going to get, for all practical purposes, is a very limited system who's design goals are EXPLICITLY stated to encorporate elements that fall entirely outside the scope of making strictly logical cosmological judgements based on the source.
From my point of view, an Alignment system with those sorts of limitations and ulterior design goals is far worse then no system at all....and certainly not worth the kind of resources required to build. You disagree and clearly GW does as well. That's fine, everyone has a right to thier own opinions. Since GW is the one betting thier livelihoods behind the game...thier opinions are the one that counts. I'm fine with that. Heck, they've even built a modification that addresses most of what would personaly effect me playing the way I enjoy... so my arguements are basicaly acedemic at this point...and I had not intention of raising them again. However you seem to be misunderstanding my objectives in this thread. GW has proposed a mechanic...there are a couple of exploits that other people have pointed out that seem to circumvent the design intent behind the mechanic...I'm trying to offer some suggestions as to how those particular exlpoits might be mitigated...it's as simple as that.... no great philosophical stance behind it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Because it's an automated system and automated systems still have VERY limited ability to judge human interaction......Frankly if they could build a system that approached the capacity of judgement of a good quality GM, I'd have probably not bothered to object...How is it you imagine they cannot to some extent model what approaches the judgement of a 'good' GM?
...
The vast majority of cases should not require the meticulous granularity you seem to presume. Usually it will just be the fact that player A killed player B and these six conditions were present (the status of flags and relative reputation). The result is either 0 or 1. Not a case for big blue at all.
Mel you have been making some good posts lately but if I see something that isn't right I'm going to speak up.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think what we need is a Dev to explain how Blood on the Tracks and Scresming for Vengeance Integrates together because they appear to conflict. I do not believe that SFV overrides BotT, but some of what is based on the type of hex we are in will override what us in SFV.
Can you explain which parts seem to conflict? I'm not seeing them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think what we need is a Dev to explain how Blood on the Tracks and Scresming for Vengeance Integrates together because they appear to conflict. I do not believe that SFV overrides BotT, but some of what is based on the type of hex we are in will override what us in SFV.
It seems pretty clear to me without any logical conflicts.
Lawless Hex = No Criminal or Tresspasser flags...all other flags apply. You can still be completely unflagged in a lawless hex.
You get an Attacker flag for attacking any UNFLAGGED (short or long term PvP) character = Chaotic Shift
Killing a character while you are flagged Attacker = Evil shift and rep loss.
Long Term PvP flags flag YOU for PvP (meaning others don't get Attacker Flag for attacking YOU) and provide you with certain specific exemptions for normal penalties applied to attacking and killing an unflagged character. The details of those exemptions are dependant upon the specific PvP flag you are wearing.
Champions = No Alignment hits for attacking and killing "Evil" characters but you still get Rep hits. Alignment hits for attacking and killing Good/Neutral characters are still in place.
Outlaws = No Rep hits for killing merchants that refused SAD. Alignment hits still remain in place (since not explicity called out as exemptions). Not hits whatsoever if Merchant accepts SAD.
That's what I get from a straight reading of the blogs. They don't nullify each other just provide specific exemptions for specific circumstances.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We know they have access to good Paizo GMs and consult closely with them. Those GMs can deliver their verdict, however, without having to worry about a player who wants a favorable outcome derailing a live game with extended argumentation with a self-interested player.
In the bad old days I was a master level GM for 3.5 Living Greyhawk and participated in a couple of conference level events with several hundred players. I can assure you even at that level there is substantial table variation and sometimes quite vocal disagreements between highly experienced GMs about rule interpretations.
Honestly I'd just rather toss SAD altogether, it doesn't seem like it's a workable idea. Bandits can already ask travellers for ransoms without any mechanics, if they want to avoid penalties for killing someone.
I think SAD could work.
My only concern is it limits the opportunity of the merchant to just scarper and see if he can get away before being shot down. Once SAD takes place he is pretty much locked into pay or fight hand-to-hand.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My only concern is it limits the opportunity of the merchant to just scarper and see if he can get away before being shot down. Once SAD takes place he is pretty much locked into pay or fight hand-to-hand.
First, I assume you mean "scamper".
Second, I don't think that's true at all. The way Hideouts were originally described, they would give the bandits the ability to knock a caravan out of Fast Travel, thus giving the bandits a chance to catch them. I haven't read anything to make me think that vision has changed significantly.
From Player-Created Buildings and Structures:
Hideouts have a "threat radius" that determines how they interact with their surroundings: when a character using fast travel enters the threat radius of a hideout, the characters in the hideout can trigger an ambush—the targets drop out of fast travel in the vicinity of the hideout, and the bandits may be able to overtake them and engage them in melee combat before they can exit the area and re-enter fast travel.
I read SAD as yet another way to engage them, but it would still require the bandits to catch them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From Player-Created Buildings and Structures:
Hideouts have a "threat radius" that determines how they interact with their surroundings: when a character using fast travel enters the threat radius of a hideout, the characters in the hideout can trigger an ambush—the targets drop out of fast travel in the vicinity of the hideout, and the bandits may be able to overtake them and engage them in melee combat before they can exit the area and re-enter fast travel.I read SAD as yet another way to engage them, but it would still require the bandits to catch them.
Which brings up an unrelated issue I have been pondering.
Who can have a hideout?
Do you have to be chaotic or could a LG paladin or bounty hunter setup a hideout in a place frequented by bandits to ambush bad guys ?