Goblin Squad Member
|
This strikes me as not genuine in "creating content". Why not just be a merchant or a guard or a bandit and play the game with the flags as intended? There will be plenty of content if we just play our roles in the spirit that GW has explained in the DevBlogs ( ie The Most Dangerous Game).
If Ryan Dancey sticks to his quote and PFO will have its FFA zone, you will not have to worry about that much banditry. You will be virtually safe in your settlement zones and in the starter zones, and perhaps only moderately at risk in the wilderness hexes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Personally, I would never choose to spend my time running around 'naked' just to get killed by bandits.
People doing so could (imo) be considered griefers for trying to exploit the system to harm players who choose to be bandits.
I think there will be plenty of volunteers for bounty hunting or do-goodery (like running champion flag) without having to resort to this sort of (imo) cheap trick.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One thing to remember, anyone attacking you (or atleast those who KILL you) no matter the situation for doing so, will show up on your enemy list to suffer your wrath in forms of bounties and death curses. Exception being assassins but that is a different story. So what is the point of this idea???
Actually not quite true Milo, from the blog
"Whenever you're killed and that killer shows up in your enemies list (you were attacked and weren't fair game)"
If you are flagged for pvp the attacker does not get added as you are fair game.
Having said that I am not sure doing this on an organised basis is a good idea but certainly as I pointed out in the other thread it is a risk that bandits have to run when attacking an unflagged sad refuser that they may get a bounty or death curse on them
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The use of decoys is the same as disguise, so it should require a skill and should fail if the bandit(s) make a successful perception roll and see through your "ploy".
We still do not know what functions a Hideout will provide?? Maybe the hideout will increase our perception, making it easier to see through such ploys?
We could also have a magic user or magic items that grant us "True Seeing" and be able to see not only your ploy, but also your cargo or lack there of.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Certainly sending out a decoy merchant caravan in order to catch bandits is creating legitimate content. Just because "you" (whomever the "you" is in this scenario...the bandit) don't like the idea of being tricked into SADding an empty caravan wagon and getting caught in the sting operation doesn't mean it is not legit.
There will be many scenarios that once performed we will feel violated (every robbery, for example), and those experiences will always leave a bitter taste in the mouth of the victim. But if they are legit interactions, they are allowed. Decoys will be frequent, but they are legit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Certainly sending out a decoy merchant caravan in order to catch bandits is creating legitimate content. Just because "you" (whomever the "you" is in this scenario...the bandit) don't like the idea of being tricked into SADding an empty caravan wagon and getting caught in the sting operation doesn't mean it is not legit.
There will be many scenarios that once performed we will feel violated (every robbery, for example), and those experiences will always leave a bitter taste in the mouth of the victim. But if they are legit interactions, they are allowed. Decoys will be frequent, but they are legit.
I did not say I didn't like the idea, nor that it was not legitimate. I suggested that a decoy is similar to the disguise skill and that it should have similar counter measures ( ie perception rolls and our magic or functions of hideouts).
Are you suggesting that a decoy should always work? Or shouldn't we have means to "see it for what it is" before we actually engage it with a SAD offer or an Ambush attack?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Surely part of the risk for a bandit is not knowing exactly what they are dealing with when they leap out to confront. You should know certainly that it is a carvan of 7 wagons...doesn't mean you know whats in them. Even less so with a lone character...who knows what is in his backpack
Did I say "know exactly"? No, I said that we should be given a chance to "see through the ploy". There may be skills or functions of the hideout that modify that chance, just as you may have available to you skills and modifiers to create a better "disguise" for your decoys.
Are you concerned that there may be balance between bandit and merchant?
The disguise / decoy group of skills might actually be applicable to Smugglers and how they conduct their trade. I would very much like to see a real smuggling system because that us a trade I have always enjoyed playing in as well.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hideouts have been (rather vaguely) noted as giving its resident bandits the ability to gather better intel on travellers in the area, the implication being this also referred to what said travellers are carrying (in order to be able to effectively select worthwhile targets). This may or may not extend to getting some measure of the contents of a caravan - whether that's a sampling of the contents, the total encumbrance of the contents, or (unlikely) a complete listing of the contents, remains to be seen.
But IMO it's very unlikely that completely empty caravans will be an effective decoy against bandits with a well-equipped hideout, it will be too obvious. If you want to send decoys, all well and good, but the decoy will have to be more along the lines of bait than a worthless replica.
On the other hand, if bandits can only get a random sampling of the caravan inventory (my preferred idea), it definitely allows for merchants to hide valuables among large amounts of low-value stuff. And if that's a regular practice, it makes picking out decoys a lot harder as well - if the "intel report" comes back showing only low value cargo, the bandits will have to make a judgement call whether (a) it is what it appears to be, (b) the merchant is hiding something, or (c) it's bait/a decoy. The better bandits will become adept at reading the signs and making good judgements. The better caravaneers will become adept at the smoke and mirrors and keep the bandits guessing incorrectly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Personally, I would never choose to spend my time running around 'naked' just to get killed by bandits.
Agreed. But if someone really wants to find where the bandits are, it's a method.
I do see a few cases where running almost naked is reasonable. Let's say a company has some common cargo to move from one settlement to another. Real common cargo, like 2000 encumbrance units of bulk stone. Instead of wasting effort and coin guarding it, maybe they just decide to use porters, carrying 20-40 units each. They send out the porters individually, with strict orders to refuse any SAD, but to fight as long as possible if attacked. They strongly encourage the porters to carry nothing but the stone unthreaded. I'd guess a lot of cargo goes through, unless the bandits are stone cold killers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I do see a few cases where running almost naked is reasonable. Let's say a company has some common cargo to move from one settlement to another. Real common cargo, like 2000 encumbrance units of bulk stone. Instead of wasting effort and coin guarding it, maybe they just decide to use porters, carrying 20-40 units each. They send out the porters individually, with strict orders to refuse any SAD, but to fight as long as possible if attacked. They strongly encourage the porters to carry nothing but the stone unthreaded. I'd guess a lot of cargo goes through, unless the bandits are stone cold killers.
Obviously, using a caravan will need to be significantly more efficient for transporting stuff than using the same number of people as "cargo mules".
Sending individual travellers is a lot riskier because you increase your possible range of predators to include everyone from large bandit gangs down to any lone wolf character in the area, or even wandering monsters.
Still, I suppose as a mass camouflage/decoy effort it could be worthwhile on rare occasions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hideouts have been (rather vaguely) noted as giving its resident bandits the ability to gather better intel on travellers in the area, the implication being this also referred to what said travellers are carrying (in order to be able to effectively select worthwhile targets). This may or may not extend to getting some measure of the contents of a caravan - whether that's a sampling of the contents, the total encumbrance of the contents, or (unlikely) a complete listing of the contents, remains to be seen.
But IMO it's very unlikely that completely empty caravans will be an effective decoy against bandits with a well-equipped hideout, it will be too obvious. If you want to send decoys, all well and good, but the decoy will have to be more along the lines of bait than a worthless replica.
On the other hand, if bandits can only get a random sampling of the caravan inventory (my preferred idea), it definitely allows for merchants to hide valuables among large amounts of low-value stuff. And if that's a regular practice, it makes picking out decoys a lot harder as well - if the "intel report" comes back showing only low value cargo, the bandits will have to make a judgement call whether (a) it is what it appears to be, (b) the merchant is hiding something, or (c) it's bait/a decoy. The better bandits will become adept at reading the signs and making good judgements. The better caravaneers will become adept at the smoke and mirrors and keep the bandits guessing incorrectly.
I agree with your idea. It is based on skills that offset each other, it is PvP and balanced.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Obviously, using a caravan will need to be significantly more efficient for transporting stuff than using the same number of people as "cargo mules".
It would be useful therefore to think about becoming an effective teamster able to drive fast, move quietly, detect threats, and use cover and camouflage to hide.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with your idea. It is based on skills that offset each other, it is PvP and balanced.Hideouts have been (rather vaguely) noted as giving its resident bandits the ability to gather better intel on travellers in the area, the implication being this also referred to what said travellers are carrying (in order to be able to effectively select worthwhile targets). This may or may not extend to getting some measure of the contents of a caravan - whether that's a sampling of the contents, the total encumbrance of the contents, or (unlikely) a complete listing of the contents, remains to be seen.
But IMO it's very unlikely that completely empty caravans will be an effective decoy against bandits with a well-equipped hideout, it will be too obvious. If you want to send decoys, all well and good, but the decoy will have to be more along the lines of bait than a worthless replica.
On the other hand, if bandits can only get a random sampling of the caravan inventory (my preferred idea), it definitely allows for merchants to hide valuables among large amounts of low-value stuff. And if that's a regular practice, it makes picking out decoys a lot harder as well - if the "intel report" comes back showing only low value cargo, the bandits will have to make a judgement call whether (a) it is what it appears to be, (b) the merchant is hiding something, or (c) it's bait/a decoy. The better bandits will become adept at reading the signs and making good judgements. The better caravaneers will become adept at the smoke and mirrors and keep the bandits guessing incorrectly.
I hope that hideout mechanic works for non-bandits as well. Rangers in a bivouac seeing bandits travelling a hex and calling in the troops seems legit to me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree with your idea. It is based on skills that offset each other, it is PvP and balanced.It is, as long as it's actively detrimental to the bandits to guess incorrectly, as opposed to simply being less loot when they roflstomp a low-value caravan.
I'm not sure what you mean by "actively detrimental"?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure what you mean by "actively detrimental"?I agree with your idea. It is based on skills that offset each other, it is PvP and balanced.It is, as long as it's actively detrimental to the bandits to guess incorrectly, as opposed to simply being less loot when they roflstomp a low-value caravan.
What I meant was that the expected gain from an average number of "wins" and "losses" should roughly zero. Thus the losses would have required some kind of negative impact.
However, I was thinking that in context of a zero-sum game, which I realize now is not the case in a game with economic growth. An "average" performance only needs to provide an "average" gain. Of course, in all cases, weighted by the value of the stakes put up to participate.
Judging what an average gain (or even zero gain) is, of course, a big can of worms - it includes intangibles like flags and other pvp consequences, not just purely economic gains.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When I spoke of balance I meant that each side has an equal type of skill to counter act what the other is attempting.
The Merchant is using the disguise / decoy skill to hide his caravan's true potential value.
The Bandit is using his perception skill, and perhaps others, to see through that disguise.
If the merchant wins, the bandit sees the caravan for what the merchant desires it to appear. Low value for true value or valuable for decoy.
If the bandits wins, he see the caravan for its true value.
A draw leaves the bandit uncertain, advantage merchant.
The merchant has two positive results , compared to the bandit's one, but I still see that as balanced because a bandit's path is supposed to be a bit more difficult and he is the aggressor.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This strikes me as not genuine in "creating content". Why not just be a merchant or a guard or a bandit and play the game with the flags as intended? There will be plenty of content if we just play our roles in the spirit that GW has explained in the DevBlogs ( ie The Most Dangerous Game).
So Chaotic Good Vigilante bandit hunters are not genuine content creation? "You shall pay for your misdeeds! In coin or in blood is your choice, scum! Make your decision."
Or are you just afraid of being called to task using the same mechanics you hope to use against others?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When I spoke of balance I meant that each side has an equal type of skill to counter act what the other is attempting.
The Merchant is using the disguise / decoy skill to hide his caravan's true potential value.
The Bandit is using his perception skill, and perhaps others, to see through that disguise.
If the merchant wins, the bandit sees the caravan for what the merchant desires it to appear. Low value for true value or valuable for decoy.
If the bandits wins, he see the caravan for its true value.
A draw leaves the bandit uncertain, advantage merchant.
The merchant has two positive results , compared to the bandit's one, but I still see that as balanced because a bandit's path is supposed to be a bit more difficult and he is the aggressor.
Simply tallying up numbers of wins and losses is not enough, you have to look at the stakes involved and the potential payouts as well.
If a bandit guesses wrong and attacks a low-value caravan, I believe they should be thinking afterwards "we should not have attacked that caravan", not "well, we only got a small prize this time." Remember, the merchant is still taking a hit if his decoy is attacked and looted - it's just not as big of a loss as losing his more valuable cargo. The only way the merchant wins completely is if the bandits don't attack at all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This sounds more like giving the middle finger to bandits and skirting the edge if exploitation of mechanics than a real anti-bandit company.
If you want to stop banditry why not make a company of bandit hunting enforcers? Why not just send out empty caravans with stealthy guards instead?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This sounds more like giving the middle finger to bandits and skirting the edge if exploitation of mechanics than a real anti-bandit company.
If you want to stop banditry why not make a company of bandit hunting enforcers? Why not just send out empty caravans with stealthy guards instead?
Right on. Trying to twist the game mechanics against bandits in an unintended way doesn't sound very legit. I'm sure there will be other, more suitable, options for those who want to hunt for bandit scalps.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I misunderstood the post originally, so my last comments are inappropriate to the discussion.
This sounds more like giving the middle finger to bandits and skirting the edge if exploitation of mechanics than a real anti-bandit company.
If you want to stop banditry why not make a company of bandit hunting enforcers? Why not just send out empty caravans with stealthy guards instead?
Andius, This sounds like a valid tactic to me. This is the rich man's way to go about it. The essence is that you are baiting bandits in order to identify them. Then you start printing the WANTED posters. It is a very realistic concept.
Enforcers is the Lawful solution. We're not all lawful. And the bandits can easily avoid the bounty scenario by avoiding unflagged targets. Running unflagged is meant to make you a less appealing target in the first place. Flagging yourself in order to accomplish this same end would be more questionable.
I understand the tactic. I say go for it if you want to. However, I do not support it so strongly to throw money at a bounty pot unless there is a severe banditry problem that is not being held in check by more straightforward tactics.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Andius and Wurner
You gentlemen seem to understand. Get your posse together, flag up Enforcer / Guardian and hunt us down! We will be the ones flagged Outlaw / Assassin.
If Merchants want protection form bandits, flag up Traveler, hire guards (NPC or PC) and we can play "Cat and Mouse". If you have Dogs on your side, maybe the Cats will lose one of their 9 lives, and the Mouse will get his cheese to the hole.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Andius and Wurner
You gentlemen seem to understand. Get your posse together, flag up Enforcer / Guardian and hunt us down! We will be the ones flagged Outlaw / Assassin.
If Merchants want protection form bandits, flag up Traveler, hire guards (NPC or PC) and we can play "Cat and Mouse". If you have Dogs on your side, maybe the Cats will lose one of their 9 lives, and the Mouse will get his cheese to the hole.
I decided to stop posting but I am a sucker for flattery. The cat-mouse-dog game is a good analogy because what we should wish for is some dynamic of action & counteraction with risks for everyone involved in a meaningful, interactive experience.
p.s., not sure what part I will want to play in the game yet, it's too early for me to commit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf, if you've gotten the idea that I'm trying to avoid PvP, you're not paying attention. I'll almost certainly be flying Traveler whenever I'm transporting goods. And I've been very vocal that I intend to have lots of really nice gear, which you might even be able to loot if you kill me.
I'm not trying to avoid PvP. I'm just trying to make sure I win.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not flying flags is not 'avoiding' PvP anyways.
Flying Flags: "Bring it on! PVP is my content!" (asking for it)
Not Flying Flags: "I do not really want to PvP. But I can't stop you, but I can make it a little bitter." (not asking for it; hence the Rep loss)
Avoiding PvP is hiding in the city, or hiring overwhelming force to escort you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Andius, This sounds like a valid tactic to me. This is the rich man's way to go about it. The essence is that you are baiting bandits in order to identify them. Then you start printing the WANTED posters. It is a very realistic concept.Enforcers is the Lawful solution. We're not all lawful. And the bandits can easily avoid the bounty scenario by avoiding unflagged targets. Running unflagged is meant to make you a less appealing target in the first place. Flagging yourself in order to accomplish this same end would be more questionable.
I understand the tactic. I say go for it if you want to. However, I do not support it so strongly to throw money at a bounty pot unless there is a severe banditry problem that is not being held in check by more straightforward tactics.
Well I listed two methods. If you keep your guards in stealth and they jump the unstealthed ones then they should be flagged so that the rest of your forces can ambush them without consequence.
I suppose what I find distasteful about this idea is that:
1. I don't see how it is fun or enhancing to either side's gameplay.
2. It doesn't seem like natural character behavior to me. Our characters may know they'll come back but they still feel pain.
I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do this or even that I will try to stop them. I just don't like / support this idea, and I think it would be more enjoyable for everyone (including themselves) if they approached the problem from another angle.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... I am sick to the back teeth of bluddwolf trying to warp everything to bandit advantage...
I understand, and I'm glad you spoke up. As Ryan keeps reminding us:
The community is the key to the whole venture. If it is allowed to become toxic, we'll be sunk. So protecting the integrity of the community is key to our long term plans...
The Community will be its own best defense. If we develop standards of behavior generally intolerant of a#%@#&!rly, the number of such will be constrained.
It's important that we all speak up. Not to attack the person, but to speak out against the idea that PFO should be "like Eve" with respect to unregulated PvP.
And most of all to let people who can't stand the idea of unregulated PvP like Eve that PFO actually is a good choice for them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Frankly I posted this not as a serious suggestion but merely because I am sick to the back teeth of bluddwolf trying to warp everything to bandit advantage and I regard a lot of what he has claimed to do as equally skirting the spirit of the game. I was merely pointing out that bandits aren't the only ones who can use the system to their advantage.
Ah. So this is not a serious suggestion.
Well I'm hopeful a lot of this can be cleared up at tonight's meeting. I've always found the ease of communication during voice chat helps cut through a lot of the tension and misunderstanding of any debate.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the key misunderstanding is that
A) Pathfinder Online is an Open World MMO with Consequence-based PVP
but that some believe that
B) Pathfinder Online is an Open World PvP MMO
It is a subtle difference in label, but a major one in implementation. I would compare it to...
A) SuperHappyFunWorld is an amusement park with water rides!
and
B) SuperHappyFunWorld is a water ride amusement park!
Amusement Park A would have water rides, but putting non-water rides into the park does not break the spirit of the park. The park still has water rides.
Amusement Park B would only have water rides. Putting a non-water ride into the amusement park would be strange and unusual for the given theme (and thus against the spirit).
Pathfinder Online is a Sandbox game where PvP has intrinsic value to the game. However the game offers other content meant to be enjoyable without the need for a user to PvP. However, you are playing pathfinder online with other people. And just like going to the amusement park with friends, you may get dragged onto rides you really don't wish to be on. When that happens, your friends lose reputation with you. This doesn't mean that you should not enter the park, there is plenty of fun to be had. But your friends may not want to abuse you too much, lest you refuse to return to the park with them again (because their rep is too low). Maybe in time you will get over it if they let you cool off (representing the Rep gain over time if you don't do anything to lose it).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Certainly sending out a decoy merchant caravan in order to catch bandits is creating legitimate content. Just because "you" (whomever the "you" is in this scenario...the bandit) don't like the idea of being tricked into SADding an empty caravan wagon and getting caught in the sting operation doesn't mean it is not legit.
There will be many scenarios that once performed we will feel violated (every robbery, for example), and those experiences will always leave a bitter taste in the mouth of the victim. But if they are legit interactions, they are allowed. Decoys will be frequent, but they are legit.
I did not say I didn't like the idea, nor that it was not legitimate. I suggested that a decoy is similar to the disguise skill and that it should have similar counter measures ( ie perception rolls and our magic or functions of hideouts).
Are you suggesting that a decoy should always work? Or shouldn't we have means to "see it for what it is" before we actually engage it with a SAD offer or an Ambush attack?
If there is a legitimate counter measure for the decoy caravan (or guard sting operation) it will be a trainable skill, and one a bandit would have to spend valuable experience points on. If that same bandit is willing to invest in the XP expense to obtain the counter measure, so much the better. Those XPs can't be invested in a different bandit focused skill. And that's fine with me.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
The use of decoys is the same as disguise, so it should require a skill and should fail if the bandit(s) make a successful perception roll and see through your "ploy".
We still do not know what functions a Hideout will provide?? Maybe the hideout will increase our perception, making it easier to see through such ploys?
We could also have a magic user or magic items that grant us "True Seeing" and be able to see not only your ploy, but also your cargo or lack there of.
It doesn't need to be a skill meditated directly by the game; decoy detection could be handled just as well by making the player skill the only factor, rather than a parallel factor.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If a bandit guesses wrong and attacks a low-value caravan, I believe they should be thinking afterwards "we should not have attacked that caravan", not "well, we only got a small prize this time."Remember, the merchant is still taking a hit if his decoy is attacked and looted - it's just not as big of a loss as losing his more valuable cargo. The only way the merchant wins completely is if the bandits don't attack at all.
1. The bandit's reaction to guessing wrong in your example is perfectly appropriate. The "We should not have attacked that caravan" thinking is based on the misconception that the only thing to be gained is wealth, when attacking a caravan.
Things to be gained from Banditry:
1. Wealth
2. Knowledge of our combat capability, and practices
3. Knowledge and familiarity with local target population
4. Our reputation with the local population
2. Yes, the merchant's only true win is not getting hit at all. There will be many, many times this will be true. The merchant can also limit the number of hits he/she takes by hiring guards. The merchant will then have to balance the need for guards, the possibility for attack and the cost factor that he/she will build into his/her prices at the market.
If you are paying your guards, more than you would likely be SAD'd for, you over spent on guards. If you hire guards to protect the low value cargos, and other merchants are hauling higher value cargos, you would likely not be targeted anyway... again, over spending on guards.
If you want to become wealthy fast, and I don't know a merchant who doesn't, then you have to be a businessman. You have to think like a businessman and factor in many things into a cost-benefit analysis.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
1. The bandit's reaction to guessing wrong in your example is perfectly appropriate. The "We should not have attacked that caravan" thinking is based on the misconception that the only thing to be gained is wealth, when attacking a caravan.
If a bandit guesses wrong and attacks a low-value caravan, I believe they should be thinking afterwards "we should not have attacked that caravan", not "well, we only got a small prize this time."
So much for "It's all about the gold".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So much for "It's all about the gold".
Gold is of course the primary motivation, but when the gold doesn't come with the effort, there are still other things gained.
I look at banditry very much the same way as I look at fishing (in RL). You go out on a great day, with all of the expectations that you will catch the "big one". You're sitting around with friends, chatting and throwing your line out. You've spent hours, and all you have to show for it is a few small fish that you had caught and released. The day is over, and no "big one".
How was my day of fishing? Pretty good I'd say. I caught a few, had a good time with my friends, and I learned some of the better spots to fish on that particular lake / pond. I also learned that this lure worked better than another.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I learned some of the better spots to fish on that particular lake / pond. I also learned that this lure worked better than another.
This is what's implied by "We shouldn't have attacked that caravan;" the learning process. It's all very philosophical and all to say "well if I hadn't done it the wrong way first I wouldn't have learned as much", but ultimately the objective of learning is to not do again what you did wrong .
So much for "It's all about the gold".Quick Rich and soon to be dead bandits think that way, Slow Rich and live long enough to enjoy your ill gotten goods bandits surely think another way.
I won't argue the merits or lack thereof of that quote, I'm just pointing out that it's something Bluddwolf has stated multiple times before.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
"It's all about the gold" is a homage to the EvE Online saying "it's all about the ISK". It is not meant to be 100% accurate, but more of a cynical remark, used to justify any activity in a Open World PvP MMO. It is kind the guy telling someone "it's not personal, its just business" and then kills him.
To answer George's question.... Refer to my fishing analogy.
The old, fat and wealthy bandit would fish every day, not knowing what that day would bring and still go out fishing the next day. He may never have as much fish that the richest fishmonger may have, but at least he never went to the store to buy those fish.
If it were not for bandits the life of a merchant would be boring. If it were not for the risk, the life of the bandit would be boring.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hey, when you quit, can I have your stuff?
I have only heard of one person quitting, he goes by the name of Obaky, but he claims he has many alts and a company that we won't see in the game.
Maybe he will give you his stuff?
If I ever quit, and I give you my stuff, it was probably someone else's to begin with anyway... The beauty of being a bandit is anything you lose, probably wan't your's to begin with anyway.