Goblin Squad Member
|
@All - There will be bandits.
There won't be bandits on every trail, every 10 feet, comprised of newbie players and newbie characters in it for the lulz.
Bandits will be careful. They'll pick their targets well. They'll often ransom the cargos rather than kill the teamsters.
A lot of Bandits will be chaotic evil. They'll cope. They'll find ways to make that work for them. It's not an easy road - butit is a road. I doubt there will be any wilderness areas in the game where you will not constantly have to be on your guard, ready to fight or flee, should someone come at you with bad intent.
Being a highwayman is hard freakin' work. That's why there's not a lot of them. Always on the run, hunted by those who seek rewards, dealing with a crappy reputation; this is the life you choose.
There's a fractal space of "characters who attack other characters" and being a simple bandit is one very small portion of that fractal space.
When you go to war, having teams disrupt logistics and supply lines will be a critical tactic. Some characters will do that.
When someone transport very valuable items they create a juicy target, a single act of highway robbery won't destroy your alignment. Some characters will specialize in the high-reward, low-impact strike.
We'll likely declare some areas free-for-all zones where conditions are so bad that nobody gets any penalty for whacking anyone. Where, how, why, how large, etc. all to be determined, but that is the kind of thing I'd expect in a land like the River Kingdoms. Of course, you'd have to be mad to go into such an area without being able to hold your own.... no easy targets.
Huh, its amazing that this is what we have been telling everyone... but no one wanted to really hear it. NO NO this is not a Open World Sandbox PVP game at all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...selective, maybe?Ryan has, at last count, 1352 posts. Selectivity is controlled by how clever we are at winkling out things we remember reading back in the day.
I thank you for pulling that up Jazzlvraz....
That post counters a lot of what others have been saying on these forums, about Ryan not wanting PVP like it was in EVE. He had never said that, He said he did not want the griefing that was in EVE.
When I tried to explain that there is no such thing as griefing in 0.0 space, a few here balked at that idea.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I doubt there will be any wilderness areas in the game where you will not constantly have to be on your guard, ready to fight or flee, should someone come at you with bad intent.Huh, its amazing that this is what we have been telling everyone... but no one wanted to really hear it. NO NO this is not a Open World Sandbox PVP game at all.
Nobody's been arguing that "this is a not Open World Sandbox PvP game", or against Ryan's statement quoted above. We're just bickering over what the consequences should be. You want PvP free of mechanical consequences, most do not.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of Bandits will be chaotic evil. They'll cope. They'll find ways to make that work for them. It's not an easy road - but it is a road. I doubt there will be any wilderness areas in the game where you will not constantly have to be on your guard, ready to fight or flee, should someone come at you with bad intent.
Being a highwayman is hard freakin' work. That's why there's not a lot of them. Always on the run, hunted by those who seek rewards, dealing with a crappy reputation; this is the life you choose.
As I said earlier on TS, Ryan when speaking of griefing in EVE Online, was not referring to 0.0 space, and according to this post, he clearly supports the creation of FFA zone{s}.
This is what I have been advocating all of this time. Give us a zone that requires PVP flagging or at least does not punish...
Here's my read. Some fearsome bandit types want the ability to attack weak unflagged characters at will, but desperately fear being attacked at will in turn - which is what would happen if they kill too many people and gain the Murderer flag. They don't really want to walk that hard road that Ryan talks about in the quote. They're risk-adverse. They want the soft road; with slow rich targets and the capability to unflag in a minute or two, whenever they face real danger. They'll talk trash about carebears all day long if you let them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Here's my read. Some fearsome bandit types want the ability to attack weak unflagged characters at will, but desperately fear being attacked at will in turn - which is what would happen if they kill too many people and gain the Murderer flag. They don't really want to walk that hard road that Ryan talks about in the quote. They're risk-adverse. They want the soft road; with slow rich targets and the capability to unflag in a minute or two, whenever they face real danger. They'll talk trash about carebears all day long if you let them.A lot of Bandits will be chaotic evil. They'll cope. They'll find ways to make that work for them. It's not an easy road - but it is a road. I doubt there will be any wilderness areas in the game where you will not constantly have to be on your guard, ready to fight or flee, should someone come at you with bad intent.
Being a highwayman is hard freakin' work. That's why there's not a lot of them. Always on the run, hunted by those who seek rewards, dealing with a crappy reputation; this is the life you choose.
As I said earlier on TS, Ryan when speaking of griefing in EVE Online, was not referring to 0.0 space, and according to this post, he clearly supports the creation of FFA zone{s}.
This is what I have been advocating all of this time. Give us a zone that requires PVP flagging or at least does not punish...
Hehehe
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not this bandit!
Though I do like getting killed almost as much as killing others. Maybe Im just a nut?
Anyways, the only thing Im afraid of is not being able to get good training, because the game mechanics don't let me play a Bandit. What I mean is either having to tip-toe around too much that its excessively boring due to needing to watch my rep (I don't want to have to break out spread sheets). Or worse yet, me trying like mad to be a bandit with meaningful PvP, but everyone I meet refusing SADs and spending their (easier to come by rep) to lower mine. This would make it impossible to successfully play a good bandit no matter what I did.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Greedalox I don't think rep has to be a huge deal. How do you get rep as an Outlaw? By having your SADs accepted. Who is most likely to accept a SAD? Someone with lots of valuable stuff. You've got the ability to check inventories, you just have to be willing to do it. If you SAD someone who has 2 healing potions - that's it - and demand 1, the poor sod is likely to fight you because he doesn't have much to lose and can afford an act of defiance. Instead you look for a rich guy who has good stuff. Maybe you ask for something like 10% of it. You get a rep boost and 10% of his valuable stuff and don't get marked as a killer.
And maybe you have a couple of good payoffs during your day and you're up on rep and haven't killed anyone in the last 8 hours. You're going to log off in an hour. Maybe the next rich guy you demand 25% - because you're sort of cruising for a fight. And maybe you get a fight and 75% of the loot; or maybe he's more interested in keeping 75% and giving you your fair 25%.
If you're a bandit - you want to steal more than you want to kill, I think it works. I think being a brigand - you want to kill as much as you want to steal - works, too, but you have to be willing to hug CE and have to be willing to be hunted.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Here's my read. Some fearsome bandit types want the ability to attack weak unflagged characters at will, but desperately fear being attacked at will in turn - which is what would happen if they kill too many people and gain the Murderer flag. They don't really want to walk that hard road that Ryan talks about in the quote. They're risk-adverse. They want the soft road; with slow rich targets and the capability to unflag in a minute or two, whenever they face real danger. They'll talk trash about carebears all day long if you let them.A lot of Bandits will be chaotic evil. They'll cope. They'll find ways to make that work for them. It's not an easy road - but it is a road. I doubt there will be any wilderness areas in the game where you will not constantly have to be on your guard, ready to fight or flee, should someone come at you with bad intent.
Being a highwayman is hard freakin' work. That's why there's not a lot of them. Always on the run, hunted by those who seek rewards, dealing with a crappy reputation; this is the life you choose.
As I said earlier on TS, Ryan when speaking of griefing in EVE Online, was not referring to 0.0 space, and according to this post, he clearly supports the creation of FFA zone{s}.
This is what I have been advocating all of this time. Give us a zone that requires PVP flagging or at least does not punish...
PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD ATTACK ME IN RETURN!!!!!!!!!!!
IT WILL NOT BE FUN IF YOU DO NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have said both of these countless times.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Killing people in a sandbox is not griefing them. Even killing them just because you can is not griefing them.
This is why we don't have a "rule" for what constitutes grief. Because if we had a rule, people will just use that rule as a license to be "just slightly less than griefing" other people.
I forgot about this quote, thanks Bluddwolf
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I doubt there will be any wilderness areas in the game where you will not constantly have to be on your guard, ready to fight or flee, should someone come at you with bad intent.Huh, its amazing that this is what we have been telling everyone... but no one wanted to really hear it. NO NO this is not a Open World Sandbox PVP game at all.Nobody's been arguing that "this is a not Open World Sandbox PvP game", or against Ryan's statement quoted above. We're just bickering over what the consequences should be. You want PvP free of mechanical consequences, most do not.
1. Yes, there are those that argue that PVP is a major focus of the game.
2. Yes we want a free of consequences zone for PVP, but don't say "most do not", when you conveniently omitted the main part of Ryan Dancey's quote from above:.... I will provided it by itself so that you can't miss it again:
We'll likely declare some areas free-for-all zones where conditions are so bad that nobody gets any penalty for whacking anyone. Where, how, why, how large, etc. all to be determined, but that is the kind of thing I'd expect in a land like the River Kingdoms. Of course, you'd have to be mad to go into such an area without being able to hold your own.... no easy targets.
@ Urman
Some fearsome bandit types want the ability to attack weak unflagged characters at will, but desperately fear being attacked at will in turn - which is what would happen if they kill too many people and gain the Murderer flag. They don't really want to walk that hard road that Ryan talks about in the quote. They're risk-adverse.
Where do you get this nonsense from? How can we be risk adverse when we want an FFA zone? Where is it said that we would do anything but fly a PVP flag (Outlaw or Assassin)?
We don't want the murderer flag due to travelers rejecting reasonable SADS, when we are clearly working within the rules and in the spirit of the flagging system, and they quite honestly are not.
If you are in an uncontrolled zone, and hauling gathered materials, and you are not flagged as a Traveler, you are not working within the spirit of the game.
If Ryan sticks to his quote above, and gives us a zone for FFA PVP, we will be satisfied with that. That is where we will be most of our time. If you want to risk getting the rare resources that reside there, enter prepared.
But don't think for a moment we want some non PVP flagged carebear entering in there and saying "I have no intentions of PVP, leave me alone."
I do not expect to be able to walk into any settlement and fly my Outlaw Flag, without being pounced on by NPC guards and any PCs that decide to jump in.
Don't come into our "settlement" flagged for PVE only and expect any different treatment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Allowing you to kill anyone non flagged without any reputation or alignment loss just because you have issued a SAD and been refused is the equivalent of handing you a "Feel free to kill anyone you like anywhere" license. So I have to say you SAD someone not flagged and make it an offer they can refuse....take the hit if you want to follow through with your threat.
As to people not flagging when travelling that is a totally unreasonable demand as there will be many people without a reasonable flag they can fly. As a merchant/crafter with no combat skills but not one that includes neutral in my alignement description what do you suggest I fly? Enforcer? It gives me no benefit so why the hell should I fly it for your convenience
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Allowing you to kill anyone non flagged without any reputation or alignment loss just because you have issued a SAD and been refused is the equivalent of handing you a "Feel free to kill anyone you like anywhere" license. So I have to say you SAD someone not flagged and make it an offer they can refuse....take the hit if you want to follow through with your threat.
As to people not flagging when travelling that is a totally unreasonable demand as there will be many people without a reasonable flag they can fly. As a merchant/crafter with no combat skills but not one that includes neutral in my alignement description what do you suggest I fly? Enforcer? It gives me no benefit so why the hell should I fly it for your convenience
What I expect is for there to be an FFA zone as Ryan has been quoted as saying, and we will be there most of the time.
What I suggest a traveler should do:
1. Use the Traveler Flag if you can. You get bonus speed and carrying capacity, plus a stack of reputation boost.
2. When SAD is reasonable, especially if it matches or is less than your bonus from the Traveler Flag, you accept it. You will then also gain a 20 minute "free passage to safety" as a mechanic that devastates the reputation of any bandit foolish enough to violate that pass.
3. I suggest that you would hire some guards, NPC more likely, and maybe even PC guards.
4. I suggest that crafter / merchants take Neutral as one of the parts of their alignment.
Bandits must be Chaotic in order to function properly within their role.
Assassins must be Evil in order to function properly within their role.
Monks must be Lawful in order to function properly within their role.
Why shouldn't merchant / crafters require Neutral in order to function properly within their role?
Merchants don't need to be neutral because they have no special powers like paladins or assassins do. Alignement restrictions come with bonus's
As to the "What I expect is for there to be an FFA zone as Ryan has been quoted as saying, and we will be there most of the time. " I care little one way or the other if there is or not. It is not the point I was arguing against I was arguing that a SAD should not give you a penalty free kill if refused when used against someone unflagged otherwise it is a license to kill anyone anywhere.
Your suggestions for what a traveller should do aren't needed I will be more than capable of managing my own affairs in this matter
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I forgot about this quote, thanks BluddwolfKilling people in a sandbox is not griefing them. Even killing them just because you can is not griefing them.
This is why we don't have a "rule" for what constitutes grief. Because if we had a rule, people will just use that rule as a license to be "just slightly less than griefing" other people.
I'm not sure who's been asserting RPKing is griefing. Just that it's undesirable behavior that's bad for the community. And what does Ryan have to say about that?
At the end of the day, if you're killing other players that are uninterested in PvP for no benefit, we want to make the costs significant enough to convince you to do something else, as that's the kind of thing that drives players away.
But that's the "sand". The other word in that term is "box". The box is the envelope we establish that defines the game and how it is to be played. One of those definitions is "don't be a jerk". Jerkiness is defined along one (of many) axis as killing without meaning.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Your suggestions for what a traveller should do aren't needed I will be more than capable of managing my own affairs in this matter
I was responding to this:
As a merchant/crafter with no combat skills but not one that includes neutral in my alignement description what do you suggest I fly?
I gave my suggestions as requested. You of course, are free to take them or leave them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The point I was responding to was your allegation that those who aren't going flagged are in some way cheating you. Some of us have no relevant flag in the first place.
Even if I did however going unflagged is as much a valid tactic to use against bandits as the SAD mechanic, the SAD allows the bandit to set risk/reward for merchants and flagged or unflagged allows merchants to alter that mechanic for bandits as do various other means. Just because you don't like it doesn't give you the ability to complain that others aren't playing the game the way you want them to.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Andius
This Ryan Dancey quote is going to be the centerpiece of my discussion tonight:
We'll likely declare some areas free-for-all zones where conditions are so bad that nobody gets any penalty for whacking anyone. Where, how, why, how large, etc. all to be determined, but that is the kind of thing I'd expect in a land like the River Kingdoms. Of course, you'd have to be mad to go into such an area without being able to hold your own.... no easy targets.
Just like in EVE, most of the PVP is pushed into the "uncontrolled" wild lands of the game world. We will be just fine with that, and function there for most of our time.
Sure we will occasionally leave and visit settlements. We will also probably SAD or attack a few travelers along the way, but we will stick to the flagging rules and uphold "OUR HIGH STANDARDS" of "Banditry Done Right".
From your end, I would hope that you see the benefit of having such a zone and advocate for it as well.
@Bluddwolf
Another reason of course to be unflagged is you only get to issue bounties or death curses when your killer shows up on your enemies list and to quote the blog "Whenever you're killed and that killer shows up in your enemies list (you were attacked and weren't fair game)". Being fair game of course meaning you were flagged.
Now being the prosperous merchant I intend to be feel free to SAD me all you want you will find I don't do my own carrying :) and therefore there will be no unthreaded loot for you. Be sure there will be a nice bounty for you in your future though when you kill me after I laugh at your SAD
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...game mechanics don't let me play a Bandit.
To repeat a tiny bit of what Ryan said:
"A lot of Bandits will be chaotic evil. They'll cope. They'll find ways to make that work for them. It's not an easy road - but it is a road."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For Bluddwolf:
More from Ryan on safe and un-safe areas:
"There will be some times and some places where you will be safe from any unwanted PvP activity. In general this will be a condition within powerful NPC Settlements who have the ability to enforce peaceable relations between characters.
There will be other places where the risk will be substantially reduced because the NPCs will be able to react to anyone who makes an unwanted attack against you fast enough to have a high likelihood of killing your attacker before they can kill your character, making such assaults highly uncommon. This kind of protection will primarily be provided when you are in an area near a powerful NPC Settlement.
There will be some places where the NPC response will not be fast enough to stop an attacker from killing your character, but will be fast enough to ensure that the attacker dies as well. This makes it less likely that you will be attacked randomly; rather such attacks will be carefully planned and executed by groups with a sense for the risk/reward of their actions. This level of protection will exist on the edges of NPC controlled territory.
Outside of NPC controlled territory, player character decisions will have a strong influence on how secure a given area is - or is not!"
For several other folks:
"...Pathfinder Online does not have open world unrestricted PvP. It is a game where there is non-consensual PvP, but not a game where that PvP occurs everywhere and without warning or consequence.
We know that some players would like to have the ability to opt out of PvP altogether. We are not going to enable that kind of functionality, because we feel that PvP is an intrinsic, critical part of "meaningful human interaction".
We feel that the presence of PvP creates interesting dynamic behavior. It creates risk and risk makes reward have value. PvP risk makes it valuable to transport goods from one location to another. It makes it valuable to work with other players to protect one-another as they explore the world, or fight monsters, or harvest resources."
That's from the first post of a thread Ryan started entitled "Player vs. Player Conflict". Coincidentally, but not surprisingly, it's also the thread that held second-place for longest thread...until this one beat it yesterday.
PVP causes conversation, that's for certain.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
i have a few related questions.
i find i quiet easy to imagine a solotarget-SAD, but what about a caravan-SAD? will the caravan´s inventory show up in the trader/haulers personal inventory (like containers in eve)?
Can a SAD even be issued against a group?
if so, does that mean the bandits gets to see every individuals inventory?
or a summary?
i think that`s a question of practicality as well as a question of how long is it going to take to finish the SAD.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
i have a few related questions.
i find i quiet easy to imagine a solotarget-SAD, but what about a caravan-SAD? will the caravan´s inventory show up in the trader/haulers personal inventory (like containers in eve)?Can a SAD even be issued against a group?
if so, does that mean the bandits gets to see every individuals inventory?
or a summary?
i think that`s a question of practicality as well as a question of how long is it going to take to finish the SAD.
On an IPad now so I can't bring up the quotes....
Some have pointed to Dev posts that suggest SADs are paid in coin and not from inventory items. If that is the case than the SAD offer might be based on the total value of the cargo.
I have no other answer about caravans, but Stephen Cheney responded that the Caravan system blog is coming soon.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Some have pointed to Dev posts that suggest SADs are paid in coin and not from inventory items. If that is the case than the SAD offer might be based on the total value of the cargo.
So far, we know that Hideouts give Bandits the ability to gain some insight into what's being transported. But you don't need to use a Hideout to offer a SAD, and you don't need to offer a SAD when you use a Hideout, so they're really separate issues.
It seems obvious to me that the current design for a SAD is that a Trade Window pops up, and the Bandit makes demands of their victim. Those demands might be for specific items, or for Coin.
I find it extremely hard to believe that the Bandit will have a UI element into which he enters "60%" that automatically calculates 60% of the value of what's being transported.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the value of goods is determined in part by the market in which they are being sold (if not, why bother transporting them further than the nearest point of sale), how on earth is the value of a merchant's goods in coin going to be decided for the purposes of SAD before they have been sold? You might argue purchase price for some goods, but what about raw materials? Short of caravans entering "flight plans" for which market they are heading to - and even then there will be local fluctuations - I don't see how it can be done other than purely arbitrarily...
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like the idea of a trade window, allowing the victim to offer whatever they think is worthwhile, be it coin or money, while the outlaw offers safe passage.
In addition to being immune from further SAD threats, I'd like to see the bandit who offers an accepted SAD to take a reputation hit if the victim is attacked and killed within the same hex by anyone; don't charge for protection that you can't provide.
The end result is that outlaws who don't murder anyone are economically equivalent to bodyguards; considering the economic and games theory around it, it might even be better to come to long-term bodyguard agreements with the powers that be in the most traveled hexes, and keep the outlaws fighting among themselves over who controls those hexes.
I know if I start taking excessive losses from a particular group in a particular location, I'm going to tell their competition how much they are making there.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At this point SAD should only be issuable at someone with a traveler flag.
I don't agree. I think that unflagged characters should be at risk of attack, and SAD can be a good way to have an interaction where both the Outlaw and his target "win". The Outlaw gets some loot *and* a rep gain, and the target doesn't die and lose everything. The demand just has to be sweet enough that the target accepts it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Which is what makes demanding "60%" of the value a nonsense, unless, of course, that percentage is not determined by the software but, as Jazz suggests, by the bandits themselves. That would make things much more interesting - and might mean that a truly successful bandit might have to widen his skill set from just combat skills to include things such as appraise. It also means hiding something of worth in a mountain of dross becomes a viable option for merchants.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd like to see the bandit who offers an accepted SAD to take a reputation hit if the victim is attacked and killed within the same hex by anyone; don't charge for protection that you can't provide.
I made a very similar suggestion at the time.
There is a general problem of having your friends rob you and give the money (or most of it) back to you.
I think a better solution would be to require the bandits to offer safe passageout of the hex. In essence, draft them as additional guards for the caravan. The bandits should not get any money until the caravan gets free of the hex without being robbed again.
I believe this solves the problem of having your friends rob you because there's essentially no difference between having your friends rob you and paying your friends to guard you.
At this point SAD should only be issuable at someone with a traveler flag.I don't agree. I think that unflagged characters should be at risk of attack, and SAD can be a good way to have an interaction where both the Outlaw and his target "win". The Outlaw gets some loot *and* a rep gain, and the target doesn't die and lose everything. The demand just has to be sweet enough that the target accepts it.
Agree 100%(with Urman for clarity) no one should ever be free from the threat of PVP whether flagged or unflagged. However PVP against unflagged characters rightly provide some disincentives such as the attacker flag and rep/alignment loss.
It is up to the would be attacker to decide if those are worth accepting for the kill.
In addition only unflagged victims get the attacker on the enemy list so it is only unflagged victims that can raise bounties. No unflagged victims means no bounty hunters
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Which is what makes demanding "60%" of the value a nonsense...
Yeah, I would think smart bandits would want to offer something closer to 10%, since that's significantly less than you'd lose if you died. Heck, it might even be worth it to charge less than that if it means that people pay it more often.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Agree 100%(with Urman for clarity) no one should ever be free from the threat of PVP whether flagged or unflagged.
I agree 99.9%. New Characters inside NPC Settlements should be completely free from the threat of PvP.
I expect Urman and ZenPagan probably both agree with that qualification.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That should be emphasized :)
This is not correct. You just have to be on someone's enemies list. You can be flagged for PvP and still place a bounty on your killer. You just not likely to do it, because as a character the frequently flags for PvP, you will have a pretty extensive list and you in turn will be on the list of others.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Agree 100%(with Urman for clarity) no one should ever be free from the threat of PVP whether flagged or unflagged.I agree 99.9%. New Characters inside NPC Settlements should be completely free from the threat of PvP.
I expect Urman and ZenPagan probably both agree with that qualification.
While I mostly agree with the qualification I have before now seen in Eve a player less than 30 minutes old get suicide ganked repeatedly everytime he undocked from the starter station by the other new players because he spent the first 20 minutes of his characters life spewing racist/misoygnistic and homophobic bile over the public channels. This was perfectly fine pvp even in a starter area in my opinion.
Motto of the story in games which don't have sides "don't be a jerk extends to what you say as well as what you do"
Whenever you're killed and that killer shows up in your enemies list (you were attacked and weren't fair game)That sure makes it sound to me like "you were attacked and weren't fair game" is a requirement in order for the person to show up on your enemies list.
Damn Nihimon went looking for that quote again and came back triumphant only to find you had beaten me to it :(
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Damn Nihimon went looking for that quote again and came back triumphant only to find you had beaten me to it :(Whenever you're killed and that killer shows up in your enemies list (you were attacked and weren't fair game)That sure makes it sound to me like "you were attacked and weren't fair game" is a requirement in order for the person to show up on your enemies list.
I'm pretty sure by now Nihimon's got a searchable quotes database implemented somewhere.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Whenever you're killed and that killer shows up in your enemies list (you were attacked and weren't fair game)That sure makes it sound to me like "you were attacked and weren't fair game" is a requirement in order for the person to show up on your enemies list.
That I believe is more specifically for the Death Curse, because the quote immediately precedes the description of the Death Curse.
This is what it says in first sentence:
Any player that hurts you shows up on your enemies list.
It seems like we have another one of those vague lines that is not directly linked to a specific issue or activity.
Furthermore, "Hurts" has many meanings short of killing you while you are unflagged.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my view if you are pvp flagged then you certainly shouldnt be able to raise a bounty otherwise we might have bluddwolf raising bounties on merchants who turned out to be stronger than they looked at which point the system ceases to make sense.
Death curse or bounty = unflagged and killed to enact seems to me at least to be the least controversial position
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...charge less than that if it means that people pay it more often.
I've been wondering what happened to the bandits who once said they'd operate like a protection racket. People in that business know that if you burn down the store, you won't get any money from them any more, and if you do it too often, the rest of the neighbourhood might stop paying you anyway.
I've always thought bandits should be in a business closer to "coercive merchant escorting" than "outright robbery". If nothing else, it'd reduce the incentive to find exploits for the "I've already paid" flag.