Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
I know this has probably been harped on before, but I wanted to approach it from a slightly different angle.
First, the obvious objections to reverting the system:
1. Theft from lower level characters.
- This has been presented and refuted. There are any number of methods to avoid theft (copper wall, scripted moving, etc), and any number of lessons to be learned along the way by new adventurers. It's not supposed to be easy to move around a town with piles of plat; it wasn't easy in the time this game is set, and it isn't always easy in RL, either. Thieves aren't born with a knowledge of how to steal, it's a rough journey to any respectable level of skill, and you pay out your rear end in fines and gweths along the way.
2. Theft bots/abuse.
- This ties into the point above, partially. Protect your money and this shouldn't be an issue.
3. Conflict/conflict resolution.
- This is, in my opinion, a red herring. First, if you don't get caught stealing, what possible right should anyone have to exact retribution, even indirectly? How could they possibly know who actually stole from them? You choose your target carefully, don't get greedy, and make a few slick grabs. This should be rewarded, not punished. If you do get caught, I see no problem with having to avoid whatever posse gets put together (thats why we have bolt-holes).
4. Stealing means you want to engage in PVP.
- Afraid not. PVP means you want to engage in pvp, and that doesn't even put you at open. Stealing, successfully, without getting caught, means you don't want to engage in any such thing. If you DO get caught, by chance or carelessness, you SHOULD be set to open and have to run for your little life. In fact, I think you should be forced to remain unhidden for a short time, to encourage caution, perhaps even have movement roundtimes to simulate random citizenry slowing you down. However, simply becoming fresh meat for random angst because you chose to steal, and didn't get caught, is a punishment that does not fit the crime. Furthermore, it doesn't make a bit of sense unless one or another god overseeing your target decided to initiate a fatwa on your life. Possibly a topic for another discussion...
5. Stealing is just plain mean.
- Yes, it is. It is deliberate criminal behavior, and goes against the Golden Rule (unless you're a masochist). The thieves guild is a choice, a rather difficult choice even to make much less stick with. Theft, as I mentioned above, is not a skill that can be scripted in the empath guild or outside the NE gate for hours. It doesn't even break even with fines until 300ish, and only half the time then. It's not taught in classes, and the learning has been limited to shops. Any significant rank requires a large operating space and a lot of time (like trade routes, but riskier). It can, and does, get you killed or maimed. It is dependent on any number of factors, and skill doesn't always guarantee success. It's wrong, and hard as hell to learn, and every thief has to earn this ability like no other.
But what does it being wrong have to do with ...well, anything? Thieves didn't invent the skill, nor did they invent their own guild. This is our chosen profession from among the options, and we gladly accept the hardships because the price is justified by the rewards, or at least it used to be.
What rewards? For the most part, thieves don't steal from other people because it's profitable, though it can be, or because they hate other people, though they might anyway. They do it because that's why they joined the guild, to step over that moral boundary with the skill they could not possibly attain outside the game. The slow, dumb, or greedy thieves deserve to be punished; pain teaches like no other stimuli. This change has turned the smart ones, the careful ones, and especially the young ones, into glorified barbarians that can pull a few coin tricks and hide well, but who actively avoid the very reason they joined the guild in the first place.
Thanks.
>>Being set to PVP Open is not a punishment.
That's like going "being arrested by the town guards and sent to jail isn't a punishment" or "being torched by an angry mob for casting sorcery isn't punishment" or "being deported from Therengia because you farted at the Baron isn't a punishment."
Some might like when it happens, and some might even foster situations that encourage it to happen to their characters (and those are great RP choices, too).
But, in all those cases where they are the appropriate responses to the given situations, let's not act like they're not penalties that take place in response to frowned upon actions.
You might like being PvP Open, and more power to you, but it's being used in a punitive manner in this situation (not that there's anything wrong with that).
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
That's like going "being arrested by the town guards and sent to jail isn't a punishment" or "being torched by an angry mob for casting sorcery isn't punishment" or "being deported from Therengia because you farted at the Baron isn't a punishment."
Some might like when it happens, and some might even foster situations that encourage it to happen to their characters (and those are great RP choices, too).
But, in all those cases where they are the appropriate responses to the given situations, let's not act like they're not penalties that take place in response to frowned upon actions.
You might like being PvP Open, and more power to you, but it's being used in a punitive manner in this situation (not that there's anything wrong with that).
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
Except it's not punitive, it's a reflection of the character's behavior. They're taking actions with a clear intent to take something from someone else. It's proactively conflictual and requires no sort of consent from the target. If someone takes advantage of that situation, they can at least offer the same to others.
I'll be very happy when more actions are brought under a similar system so that people can stop trying to pull the "But X doesn't force you open!" card.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
I'll be very happy when more actions are brought under a similar system so that people can stop trying to pull the "But X doesn't force you open!" card.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
The logic of why it was changed can be summarized as, If you're willing to place unfavorable circumstance on another player than other players should be able to place unfavorable circumstance on you.
Player A stealing from player B may not necessarily have the same negative connotation as player B stealing back from player A, so the OPEN PvP stance is pretty much an all inclusive way of saying, "I accept that I am placing a bad situation on another player, and am open to others placing a bad situation on me."
__
~Leilond
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com
Player A stealing from player B may not necessarily have the same negative connotation as player B stealing back from player A, so the OPEN PvP stance is pretty much an all inclusive way of saying, "I accept that I am placing a bad situation on another player, and am open to others placing a bad situation on me."
__
~Leilond
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com
>>That's like going "being arrested by the town guards and sent to jail isn't a punishment" or "being torched by an angry mob for casting sorcery isn't punishment" or "being deported from Therengia because you farted at the Baron isn't a punishment."
I wasn't aware that PvP Open had an IC justification. Care to share it?
Ogdaro and Leilond have covered the rest of your post.
I wasn't aware that PvP Open had an IC justification. Care to share it?
Ogdaro and Leilond have covered the rest of your post.
>>Except it's not punitive, it's a reflection of the character's behavior.
I'm not sure how it being punitive is mutually exclusive from being a reflection of a character's behavior.
>>They're taking actions with a clear intent to take something from someone else. It's proactively conflictual and requires no sort of consent from the target. If someone takes advantage of that situation, they can at least offer the same to others.
I agree completely.
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
I'm not sure how it being punitive is mutually exclusive from being a reflection of a character's behavior.
>>They're taking actions with a clear intent to take something from someone else. It's proactively conflictual and requires no sort of consent from the target. If someone takes advantage of that situation, they can at least offer the same to others.
I agree completely.
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
>>I'm not sure how it being punitive is mutually exclusive from being a reflection of a character's behavior.
Perhaps just a difference in perceptions on what constitutes punishment. Being set to a particular stance doesn't, in and of itself, harm a character in any way. I'm always set open, but I don't feel like that makes me a masochist. It's how the other party responds, and one's own previous behavior, that determines whether or not it's ultimately punitive.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
Perhaps just a difference in perceptions on what constitutes punishment. Being set to a particular stance doesn't, in and of itself, harm a character in any way. I'm always set open, but I don't feel like that makes me a masochist. It's how the other party responds, and one's own previous behavior, that determines whether or not it's ultimately punitive.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
>>Being set to a particular stance doesn't, in and of itself, harm a character in any way.
True.
>>It's how the other party responds, and one's own previous behavior, that determines whether or not it's ultimately punitive.
Agreed, but at the same time, and in this particular situation (where acting in a generally bad manner results in being set Open), I think it tends to tilt the scale toward the "ultimately punitive" side.
Although I feel the need to point out, once again, that I see nothing wrong with that, and I'm pro "hostile actions permitting hostile responses." Maybe I'm misreading some responses but it seemed some think I'm trying to argue against it or something.
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
True.
>>It's how the other party responds, and one's own previous behavior, that determines whether or not it's ultimately punitive.
Agreed, but at the same time, and in this particular situation (where acting in a generally bad manner results in being set Open), I think it tends to tilt the scale toward the "ultimately punitive" side.
Although I feel the need to point out, once again, that I see nothing wrong with that, and I'm pro "hostile actions permitting hostile responses." Maybe I'm misreading some responses but it seemed some think I'm trying to argue against it or something.
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
<<If someone takes advantage of that situation, they can at least offer the same to others.
And they do, by carrying the now liberated coin around. Keeping it then becomes the thief's problem, just as it was for his/her target. I didn't ask for thieves to be exempt from being the targets of theft... Turn and turn alike, as you say, would imply equal risk, yes? How is your risk of losing coin equal to my risk of being hunted mercilessly?
This move, or rather this argument, asserts an over-arching net of fair-ness, wherein "negative connotations" should be punished immediately based solely upon the moral implications, disregarding any chance of the thief actually getting away "clean". If it is possible to steal without being "caught", it should be reflected in your pvp status. If I don't want to get hunted, I shouldn't get caught. I'm a thief, stealing is going to happen; the punishment should be for doing it wrong, not doing it period.
<<Except it's not punitive, it's a reflection of the character's behavior.
It is punitive, immediately, and without regard to success or failure. I addressed the moral argument, its a non-sequitor simply because thieves are a playable class.
<<Perhaps just a difference in perceptions on what constitutes punishment. Being set to a particular stance doesn't, in and of itself, harm a character in any way. I'm always set open, but I don't feel like that makes me a masochist. It's how the other party responds, and one's own previous behavior, that determines whether or not it's ultimately punitive.
You cannot be open and remain within any of the mainland cities without being repeatedly killed until you close your status. This is not RP opportunity, its an arrow from the darkness without a word spoken. I didn't even know about the change when I came back, and after being killed 4 times in 2 days, I finally consulted a mentor and discovered that those 5 bronze kro I pulled off a moonie outside the bank were being forcefully removed from my hide by random people with zero knowledge of my crime.
To claim the open status is generally benign is to ignore the increased frequency of encouraged pvp combat, and the lax rules regarding picking on people. Not to mention the slim to nil chance of avoiding departure and mem loss unless playing at peak hours. I went from 7 deaths and 1 depart to 22 deaths and 14 departs in the space of 2 weeks until I finally gave up on stealing altogether.
Hide in a cave in Qi and call me paranoid all you want, you're not adding anything to the conversation but hot air.
And they do, by carrying the now liberated coin around. Keeping it then becomes the thief's problem, just as it was for his/her target. I didn't ask for thieves to be exempt from being the targets of theft... Turn and turn alike, as you say, would imply equal risk, yes? How is your risk of losing coin equal to my risk of being hunted mercilessly?
This move, or rather this argument, asserts an over-arching net of fair-ness, wherein "negative connotations" should be punished immediately based solely upon the moral implications, disregarding any chance of the thief actually getting away "clean". If it is possible to steal without being "caught", it should be reflected in your pvp status. If I don't want to get hunted, I shouldn't get caught. I'm a thief, stealing is going to happen; the punishment should be for doing it wrong, not doing it period.
<<Except it's not punitive, it's a reflection of the character's behavior.
It is punitive, immediately, and without regard to success or failure. I addressed the moral argument, its a non-sequitor simply because thieves are a playable class.
<<Perhaps just a difference in perceptions on what constitutes punishment. Being set to a particular stance doesn't, in and of itself, harm a character in any way. I'm always set open, but I don't feel like that makes me a masochist. It's how the other party responds, and one's own previous behavior, that determines whether or not it's ultimately punitive.
You cannot be open and remain within any of the mainland cities without being repeatedly killed until you close your status. This is not RP opportunity, its an arrow from the darkness without a word spoken. I didn't even know about the change when I came back, and after being killed 4 times in 2 days, I finally consulted a mentor and discovered that those 5 bronze kro I pulled off a moonie outside the bank were being forcefully removed from my hide by random people with zero knowledge of my crime.
To claim the open status is generally benign is to ignore the increased frequency of encouraged pvp combat, and the lax rules regarding picking on people. Not to mention the slim to nil chance of avoiding departure and mem loss unless playing at peak hours. I went from 7 deaths and 1 depart to 22 deaths and 14 departs in the space of 2 weeks until I finally gave up on stealing altogether.
Hide in a cave in Qi and call me paranoid all you want, you're not adding anything to the conversation but hot air.
>You cannot be open and remain within any of the mainland cities without being repeatedly killed until you close your status.
This appears to be a very skewed view. If you have characters lining up to kill you the moment you go open, you are doing something far more wrong then simple theft.
Elusive
mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
This appears to be a very skewed view. If you have characters lining up to kill you the moment you go open, you are doing something far more wrong then simple theft.
Elusive
mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
>>How is your risk of losing coin equal to my risk of being hunted mercilessly?
You're hunting your way. They're hunting theirs.
>>You cannot be open and remain within any of the mainland cities without being repeatedly killed until you close your status.
Half-true. DR has a definite problem with a select few people metagaming and, most likely, going "hey, that guy is complaining about how he's stuck Open due to stealing, let's kill him!," but for the strong majority of people who are Open they really don't get in any trouble. The problem are the metagamers who decide they want to kill a specific player's character just because.
Of course, the solution to dealing with those people aren't "let's not make stealing something that you should be pvp open for doing," so it doesn't really help your case. The people who proactively target characters based on who plays them is another issue entirely, and not something that just magically started happening the moment PvP open/guarded/closed came to be.
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
You're hunting your way. They're hunting theirs.
>>You cannot be open and remain within any of the mainland cities without being repeatedly killed until you close your status.
Half-true. DR has a definite problem with a select few people metagaming and, most likely, going "hey, that guy is complaining about how he's stuck Open due to stealing, let's kill him!," but for the strong majority of people who are Open they really don't get in any trouble. The problem are the metagamers who decide they want to kill a specific player's character just because.
Of course, the solution to dealing with those people aren't "let's not make stealing something that you should be pvp open for doing," so it doesn't really help your case. The people who proactively target characters based on who plays them is another issue entirely, and not something that just magically started happening the moment PvP open/guarded/closed came to be.
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
>>Turn and turn alike, as you say, would imply equal risk, yes? How is your risk of losing coin equal to my risk of being hunted mercilessly?
You're doing it wrong.
>>It is punitive, immediately, and without regard to success or failure. I addressed the moral argument, its a non-sequitor simply because thieves are a playable class.
There is no requirement that Thieves steal from other player characters. There is no non sequitur. It's an action you freely choose to engage in (or not to engage in) that has a direct and negative impact on another.
>>Hide in a cave in Qi and call me paranoid all you want, you're not adding anything to the conversation but hot air.
This isn't conflicts so I'm not going to respond to this other than saying you obviously know nothing about me.
I won't deny there are certain folks around Crossing in particular that like to take pot-shots at Open folks pretty much at random. The places they hang out aren't hard to avoid if you choose to, however. Again, you're pretty much doing it wrong from what I can tell.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
You're doing it wrong.
>>It is punitive, immediately, and without regard to success or failure. I addressed the moral argument, its a non-sequitor simply because thieves are a playable class.
There is no requirement that Thieves steal from other player characters. There is no non sequitur. It's an action you freely choose to engage in (or not to engage in) that has a direct and negative impact on another.
>>Hide in a cave in Qi and call me paranoid all you want, you're not adding anything to the conversation but hot air.
This isn't conflicts so I'm not going to respond to this other than saying you obviously know nothing about me.
I won't deny there are certain folks around Crossing in particular that like to take pot-shots at Open folks pretty much at random. The places they hang out aren't hard to avoid if you choose to, however. Again, you're pretty much doing it wrong from what I can tell.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
>>This appears to be a very skewed view. If you have characters lining up to kill you the moment you go open, you are doing something far more wrong then simple theft.
Just to play devil's advocate, that's not necessarily true. There are tools that people can(and do) use which are able to alert and/or record a player's PvP profile setting. I have no doubts that some players use such tools to prey upon OPEN characters.
__
~Leilond
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com
Just to play devil's advocate, that's not necessarily true. There are tools that people can(and do) use which are able to alert and/or record a player's PvP profile setting. I have no doubts that some players use such tools to prey upon OPEN characters.
__
~Leilond
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com
<<Of course, the solution to dealing with those people aren't "let's not make stealing something that you should be pvp open for doing," so it doesn't really help your case.
You are ignoring the fundamental point of my post: not getting caught means not getting caught. Your argument is an appeal to the greater good, not a practical approach to conflict resolution. I lift a few coins from you, you don't catch me doing it and don't notice until later, what possible justification for my death can you bring to bear other than, "I'm mad at him, so he deserves what he gets". If I'm struck down 10 minutes later by someone else, you wouldn't even realize this perverted justice of yours had been served!
<< If you have characters lining up to kill you the moment you go open, you are doing something far more wrong then simple theft.
2 days after returning, one lift outside the bank, wasn't caught because I didn't get greedy or careless. I didn't have time to make anyone angry, much less that angry. Moreover, the subsequent deed was done with nary a word. I was picking boxes for someone and suddenly had a sword through my throat. Shortly thereafter, I hid outside the bank while I stepped away for a bio break and came back to find that a moonie who I had never met found me in hiding and killed me, right there. I sought said moonie out and asked her what I had done. The answer? "I was bored." She then attempted to repeat the feat, because my question had annoyed her. She didn't even know what class I was, much less whether I had done anything. That is what pvp open means.
<<You're hunting your way. They're hunting theirs.
"They" aren't hunting anything if "they" don't catch me. I thought I was clear in my first post, I have no problem dealing with the consequences IF I AM CAUGHT. However, even if I'm NOT caught, I still get gunned down by someone else. You're simply saying it's OK because the end result is that I get punished for doing bad. Again, an appeal to the greater good, completely ignoring the mechanics of the game.
Say person B stole a brownie from random person A. A doesn't catch you doing it, has no way of knowing who took it. In stealing the brownie, person B has done a BAD thing, and would expect repercussions from persons A, C, D, etc WERE HE CAUGHT. In this case, person A has suffered the loss of a brownie, and is therefore disappointed, and rightly so, but has no target upon which to heap blame. Person B has gotten away clean, which may harm your sensibilities, but in all practicality, the conflict ends there. At what point does it become OK for person Z to show up and kill person B, having no knowledge of B's crime? Only if an omniscient adjudicator were present to smite person B would he/she have any reason to be worried. PVP OPEN upon the ACT of stealing is to enact an omniscient Judge and Jury, opening the door to person Z, et al, to enact any sort of unguided execution.
I am arguing that the omniscient Judge and Jury is an unnecessary, and a burdensome, addition upon the already existing framework for conflict resolution, geared directly towards thieves for basically being...thieves.
<<For the most part, thieves don't steal from other people because it's profitable, though it can be, or because they hate other people, though they might anyway. They do it because that's why they joined the guild, to step over that moral boundary with the skill they could not possibly attain outside the game. The slow, dumb, or greedy thieves deserve to be punished; pain teaches like no other stimuli. This change has turned the smart ones, the careful ones, and especially the young ones, into glorified barbarians that can pull a few coin tricks and hide well, but who actively avoid the very reason they joined the guild in the first place.
You are ignoring the fundamental point of my post: not getting caught means not getting caught. Your argument is an appeal to the greater good, not a practical approach to conflict resolution. I lift a few coins from you, you don't catch me doing it and don't notice until later, what possible justification for my death can you bring to bear other than, "I'm mad at him, so he deserves what he gets". If I'm struck down 10 minutes later by someone else, you wouldn't even realize this perverted justice of yours had been served!
<< If you have characters lining up to kill you the moment you go open, you are doing something far more wrong then simple theft.
2 days after returning, one lift outside the bank, wasn't caught because I didn't get greedy or careless. I didn't have time to make anyone angry, much less that angry. Moreover, the subsequent deed was done with nary a word. I was picking boxes for someone and suddenly had a sword through my throat. Shortly thereafter, I hid outside the bank while I stepped away for a bio break and came back to find that a moonie who I had never met found me in hiding and killed me, right there. I sought said moonie out and asked her what I had done. The answer? "I was bored." She then attempted to repeat the feat, because my question had annoyed her. She didn't even know what class I was, much less whether I had done anything. That is what pvp open means.
<<You're hunting your way. They're hunting theirs.
"They" aren't hunting anything if "they" don't catch me. I thought I was clear in my first post, I have no problem dealing with the consequences IF I AM CAUGHT. However, even if I'm NOT caught, I still get gunned down by someone else. You're simply saying it's OK because the end result is that I get punished for doing bad. Again, an appeal to the greater good, completely ignoring the mechanics of the game.
Say person B stole a brownie from random person A. A doesn't catch you doing it, has no way of knowing who took it. In stealing the brownie, person B has done a BAD thing, and would expect repercussions from persons A, C, D, etc WERE HE CAUGHT. In this case, person A has suffered the loss of a brownie, and is therefore disappointed, and rightly so, but has no target upon which to heap blame. Person B has gotten away clean, which may harm your sensibilities, but in all practicality, the conflict ends there. At what point does it become OK for person Z to show up and kill person B, having no knowledge of B's crime? Only if an omniscient adjudicator were present to smite person B would he/she have any reason to be worried. PVP OPEN upon the ACT of stealing is to enact an omniscient Judge and Jury, opening the door to person Z, et al, to enact any sort of unguided execution.
I am arguing that the omniscient Judge and Jury is an unnecessary, and a burdensome, addition upon the already existing framework for conflict resolution, geared directly towards thieves for basically being...thieves.
<<For the most part, thieves don't steal from other people because it's profitable, though it can be, or because they hate other people, though they might anyway. They do it because that's why they joined the guild, to step over that moral boundary with the skill they could not possibly attain outside the game. The slow, dumb, or greedy thieves deserve to be punished; pain teaches like no other stimuli. This change has turned the smart ones, the careful ones, and especially the young ones, into glorified barbarians that can pull a few coin tricks and hide well, but who actively avoid the very reason they joined the guild in the first place.
<<This isn't conflicts so I'm not going to respond to this other than saying you obviously know nothing about me.
I want to apologize for that comment, I got caught up in my own frustration. You're absolutely right, I don't know a thing about you.
I would like to point out your quote at the bottom of every post:
<<"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
The last four words are a distillation of my argument here. IF you mess up.
I want to apologize for that comment, I got caught up in my own frustration. You're absolutely right, I don't know a thing about you.
I would like to point out your quote at the bottom of every post:
<<"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
The last four words are a distillation of my argument here. IF you mess up.
There has always been a trend toward discouraging or just plain disallowing CvC stealing. This change makes the thief take ownership of their actions but I would like to see some of the restrictions lifted now, like items in hands, the impossibility of stealing gems in pouches, no steal areas etc.
>>The last four words are a distillation of my argument here. IF you mess up.
True, but I sense we have a difference of opinion on what constitutes messing up.
Getting caught stealing and thus drawing attention to yourself and your now Open status is messing up.
Finding that if you're Open and hang out around certain areas you're likely to get shot randomly in the face, and continuing to hang out in those places while Open, is also messing up. I'm not saying it's great RP to kill people at random, but it's definitely valid RP. It's also valid RP to avoid things that your character has established to have undesired consequences.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
True, but I sense we have a difference of opinion on what constitutes messing up.
Getting caught stealing and thus drawing attention to yourself and your now Open status is messing up.
Finding that if you're Open and hang out around certain areas you're likely to get shot randomly in the face, and continuing to hang out in those places while Open, is also messing up. I'm not saying it's great RP to kill people at random, but it's definitely valid RP. It's also valid RP to avoid things that your character has established to have undesired consequences.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
>>"They" aren't hunting anything if "they" don't catch me.
A few points.
1. You don't always catch everyone who sees you doing something.
2. They may not even be trying to kill you in relation to something you did. They're hunting for victims. You're hunting for victims.
>> Say person B stole a brownie from random person A. A doesn't catch you doing it, has no way of knowing who took it. In stealing the brownie, person B has done a BAD thing, and would expect repercussions from persons A, C, D, etc WERE HE CAUGHT.
You're not set to Open explicitly because you were caught stealing. You're set to Open because you've acknowledged in the game that, as a player, you enjoy engaging in hostile actions against other players.
You went "you know what, I like engaging in conflicts" by stealing.
>>I am arguing that the omniscient Judge and Jury is an unnecessary, and a burdensome, addition upon the already existing framework for conflict resolution, geared directly towards thieves for basically being...thieves.
This is kinda amusing in light of the Necromancer guild. Unlike Necromancers, you have the option to fully function as a Thief character who doesn't engage in PvP as long as you do one thing: choose to not steal from PCs which you admit isn't even all that profitable.
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
A few points.
1. You don't always catch everyone who sees you doing something.
2. They may not even be trying to kill you in relation to something you did. They're hunting for victims. You're hunting for victims.
>> Say person B stole a brownie from random person A. A doesn't catch you doing it, has no way of knowing who took it. In stealing the brownie, person B has done a BAD thing, and would expect repercussions from persons A, C, D, etc WERE HE CAUGHT.
You're not set to Open explicitly because you were caught stealing. You're set to Open because you've acknowledged in the game that, as a player, you enjoy engaging in hostile actions against other players.
You went "you know what, I like engaging in conflicts" by stealing.
>>I am arguing that the omniscient Judge and Jury is an unnecessary, and a burdensome, addition upon the already existing framework for conflict resolution, geared directly towards thieves for basically being...thieves.
This is kinda amusing in light of the Necromancer guild. Unlike Necromancers, you have the option to fully function as a Thief character who doesn't engage in PvP as long as you do one thing: choose to not steal from PCs which you admit isn't even all that profitable.
"We're not "out to get you," we're here to enhance your playing experience with extreme prejudice.," DR-ARMIFER
<<True, but I sense we have a difference of opinion on what constitutes messing up.
We disagree on what it means to succeed, or 'do it right'. See below.
<<Getting caught stealing and thus drawing attention to yourself and your now Open status is messing up.
Agreed, wholeheartedly.
<<Finding that if you're Open and hang out around certain areas you're likely to get shot randomly in the face, and continuing to hang out in those places while Open, is also messing up
Agreed, again.
<<It's also valid RP to avoid things that your character has established to have undesired consequences.
Agreed, yet again. I am aware that this is how it is now, which is the whole reason I'm here, writing this: I disagree with how it is now.
None of this addresses my main point. You said I was "doing it wrong" in your earlier post, implying that there is a correct method. I agree with this, but I think we disagree on what the correct method is. You seem to suggest that the correct method is simply inaction, while I feel that the correct method is to accomplish the theft without being caught.
Is it really that unreasonable to shift your view of the correct method over to 'not getting caught' rather than 'not acting'? Isn't that the whole point of being a thief? to steal without getting caught?
We disagree on what it means to succeed, or 'do it right'. See below.
<<Getting caught stealing and thus drawing attention to yourself and your now Open status is messing up.
Agreed, wholeheartedly.
<<Finding that if you're Open and hang out around certain areas you're likely to get shot randomly in the face, and continuing to hang out in those places while Open, is also messing up
Agreed, again.
<<It's also valid RP to avoid things that your character has established to have undesired consequences.
Agreed, yet again. I am aware that this is how it is now, which is the whole reason I'm here, writing this: I disagree with how it is now.
None of this addresses my main point. You said I was "doing it wrong" in your earlier post, implying that there is a correct method. I agree with this, but I think we disagree on what the correct method is. You seem to suggest that the correct method is simply inaction, while I feel that the correct method is to accomplish the theft without being caught.
Is it really that unreasonable to shift your view of the correct method over to 'not getting caught' rather than 'not acting'? Isn't that the whole point of being a thief? to steal without getting caught?
Once again, you seem to miss the point.
You are not being punished for stealing.
You are being forced to allow people to do to you what you consider to be okay to do to others.
You have chosen to attempt to inflict unnecessiary harm upon another character, and thus there is now a window for it to be done to you.
"Your suffering amuses me" -GM Raesh
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Blunts for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
You are not being punished for stealing.
You are being forced to allow people to do to you what you consider to be okay to do to others.
You have chosen to attempt to inflict unnecessiary harm upon another character, and thus there is now a window for it to be done to you.
"Your suffering amuses me" -GM Raesh
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Blunts for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
>> - This is, in my opinion, a red herring. First, if you don't get caught stealing, what possible right should anyone have to exact retribution, even indirectly? How could they possibly know who actually stole from them?
There are ways for someone to know they are being stolen from (and who is stealing from them) without actually catching the person mechanically.
Melete
[Turmis] I'm about to shoot beards in the face
There are ways for someone to know they are being stolen from (and who is stealing from them) without actually catching the person mechanically.
Melete
[Turmis] I'm about to shoot beards in the face
>>Is it really that unreasonable to shift your view of the correct method over to 'not getting caught' rather than 'not acting'?
For me, yes, it would be unreasonable. I'll restate my position on it in general so that maybe it makes more sense: I don't consider being set Open for PvP stealing to be a punishment, it would be better described as the price of admission. You are taking an action that removes another player's free will, in order to do that, you surrender your own for a short time.
>>Isn't that the whole point of being a thief? to steal without getting caught?
No, not really. My primary character is a Barbarian who often PvP steals, I've also played a Thief in the past, who also PvP stole. My reasoning for stealing has never been to not get caught, with either of them. In fact, my entire reason for stealing at this point is to get caught. It's the sole reason I do it. I don't want their coins or gems or anything like that, I want a roleplayed interaction between my character and theirs, where I provide the bad guy. It's pretty much as simple as that.
I'm not saying that's the approach everybody should take, different characters are different, and different players will have different motivations, as you and I seem to have.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
For me, yes, it would be unreasonable. I'll restate my position on it in general so that maybe it makes more sense: I don't consider being set Open for PvP stealing to be a punishment, it would be better described as the price of admission. You are taking an action that removes another player's free will, in order to do that, you surrender your own for a short time.
>>Isn't that the whole point of being a thief? to steal without getting caught?
No, not really. My primary character is a Barbarian who often PvP steals, I've also played a Thief in the past, who also PvP stole. My reasoning for stealing has never been to not get caught, with either of them. In fact, my entire reason for stealing at this point is to get caught. It's the sole reason I do it. I don't want their coins or gems or anything like that, I want a roleplayed interaction between my character and theirs, where I provide the bad guy. It's pretty much as simple as that.
I'm not saying that's the approach everybody should take, different characters are different, and different players will have different motivations, as you and I seem to have.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
<<1. You don't always catch everyone who sees you doing something.
An involved third-party who witnesses the act should have full authority to intervene. I agree with this, but it is not an inference from my quoted comment. IF I am not caught, by anyone, I still get set to open as though I were.
<<2. They may not even be trying to kill you in relation to something you did. They're hunting for victims. You're hunting for victims.
They generally aren't, that is why this is an unreasonable result for an otherwise unwitnessed action. Like I said, if they find me, they can hunt me or get friends to hunt me, and pvp should be set to open in that circumstance. Hell, I'll even go for extended consent until the kill is achieved, or the coins returned.
<<You went "you know what, I like engaging in conflicts" by stealing.
I like running the risk of engaging in conflicts, conflicts with RP value. Stealing successfully should not open my character up to unrelated "retribution" by uninvolved and/or uninterested parties.
<<choose to not steal from PCs which you admit isn't even all that profitable.
It isn't profitable, and it's risky, and thats why I joined the guild. I did not join the guild so that every theft opens me up to being eviscerated by any random person who happens by. This opens up the obvious question of why ACTUAL player combat doesn't set you to open. We can go down that road if you wish, but it's not going to help your argument much.
An involved third-party who witnesses the act should have full authority to intervene. I agree with this, but it is not an inference from my quoted comment. IF I am not caught, by anyone, I still get set to open as though I were.
<<2. They may not even be trying to kill you in relation to something you did. They're hunting for victims. You're hunting for victims.
They generally aren't, that is why this is an unreasonable result for an otherwise unwitnessed action. Like I said, if they find me, they can hunt me or get friends to hunt me, and pvp should be set to open in that circumstance. Hell, I'll even go for extended consent until the kill is achieved, or the coins returned.
<<You went "you know what, I like engaging in conflicts" by stealing.
I like running the risk of engaging in conflicts, conflicts with RP value. Stealing successfully should not open my character up to unrelated "retribution" by uninvolved and/or uninterested parties.
<<choose to not steal from PCs which you admit isn't even all that profitable.
It isn't profitable, and it's risky, and thats why I joined the guild. I did not join the guild so that every theft opens me up to being eviscerated by any random person who happens by. This opens up the obvious question of why ACTUAL player combat doesn't set you to open. We can go down that road if you wish, but it's not going to help your argument much.
>This opens up the obvious question of why ACTUAL player combat doesn't set you to open. We can go down that road if you wish, but it's not going to help your argument much.
It will, when they get around to it.
"Your suffering amuses me" -GM Raesh
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Blunts for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
It will, when they get around to it.
"Your suffering amuses me" -GM Raesh
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Blunts for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
<< In fact, my entire reason for stealing at this point is to get caught. It's the sole reason I do it.
That avenue was available under the old system. The new system is broken for people who want to RP a smart, careful thief without fighting every random bully. I'm glad your combat capabilities are such that any encounter will turn out interesting, but not all of us are as well endowed, or as combative, as all that.
I appreciate your position, but I am at a loss as to why you're even arguing against me at this point. I would think someone with those intentions couldn't care less either way.
That avenue was available under the old system. The new system is broken for people who want to RP a smart, careful thief without fighting every random bully. I'm glad your combat capabilities are such that any encounter will turn out interesting, but not all of us are as well endowed, or as combative, as all that.
I appreciate your position, but I am at a loss as to why you're even arguing against me at this point. I would think someone with those intentions couldn't care less either way.
<<There are ways for someone to know they are being stolen from (and who is stealing from them) without actually catching the person mechanically.
Then they "caught" me. Let the rumble ensue. Thats not something I have a problem with, nor will I in the future. It is success that is punished for it's moral implications, irrespective of the game mechanics, that bugs me.
Then they "caught" me. Let the rumble ensue. Thats not something I have a problem with, nor will I in the future. It is success that is punished for it's moral implications, irrespective of the game mechanics, that bugs me.
My problem with stealing setting one open is that it bifurcates the CvC flag mechanics. What happened to the guarded stance? This and many of the other policies split people into open and not-open. And the big problem there is that is how most every one views it.
Yamcer
"You know, while I understand the importance of seeing the (personal) validity in other's arguments, it's impossible for me to believe fully that others are correct. If their argument was correct, I'd change mine." - My GF
Yamcer
"You know, while I understand the importance of seeing the (personal) validity in other's arguments, it's impossible for me to believe fully that others are correct. If their argument was correct, I'd change mine." - My GF
<<That said, I would sincerely like to know why you feel the right to pick your interactions with other people while also forcing your own interactions on a different group of people.
Thats the nature of the class. This isn't about my moral compass, it's about whether not getting caught should result the same as being caught. If I was that ill behaved, I wouldn't be playing the game; I would be in paris breaking into Le Louvre.
Thats the nature of the class. This isn't about my moral compass, it's about whether not getting caught should result the same as being caught. If I was that ill behaved, I wouldn't be playing the game; I would be in paris breaking into Le Louvre.
>Thats the nature of the class.
That's like saying as a Barbarian, I should be allowed to attack anyone, any time I like, because that's what my class does.
"Your suffering amuses me" -GM Raesh
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Blunts for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
That's like saying as a Barbarian, I should be allowed to attack anyone, any time I like, because that's what my class does.
"Your suffering amuses me" -GM Raesh
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Blunts for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
<<That's like saying as a Barbarian, I should be allowed to attack anyone, any time I like, because that's what my class does.
That is a bad analogy, I was speaking about choosing interactions, not stealing. I agree stealing is not compulsory, but it should be a risk to steal from players, not an outright death sentence. This analysis would only work if I were backstabbing my victims then rifling their pockets.
That is a bad analogy, I was speaking about choosing interactions, not stealing. I agree stealing is not compulsory, but it should be a risk to steal from players, not an outright death sentence. This analysis would only work if I were backstabbing my victims then rifling their pockets.
<<I want automatic consent to kill thieves and necromancers because I'm both a protector of the innocent and a holy warrior. Plz fix.
If you can identify a practicing thief or necromancer, this is an option. I have stated repeatedly that I don't have a problem with this. But unless you can prove I'm stealing, or raising dead people, you would be nothing but a sociopath slaying random citizens because they look shady.
If you can identify a practicing thief or necromancer, this is an option. I have stated repeatedly that I don't have a problem with this. But unless you can prove I'm stealing, or raising dead people, you would be nothing but a sociopath slaying random citizens because they look shady.
<<I want automatic consent to kill thieves and necromancers because I'm both a protector of the innocent and a holy warrior. Plz fix.
Please don't give her that ability. She already abuses poor barbarians. :(
Player of Drevid and Jhaval
http://www.phiiskeep.homestead.com/Barbarian.html
Cylons... why debugging matters.
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid. --John Wayne
Please don't give her that ability. She already abuses poor barbarians. :(
Player of Drevid and Jhaval
http://www.phiiskeep.homestead.com/Barbarian.html
Cylons... why debugging matters.
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid. --John Wayne
>>The new system is broken for people who want to RP a smart, careful thief without fighting every random bully.
It doesn't, though. A smart, careful thief who wants to avoid fights can do so far more easily than any other guild I can think of. Khri silence -> go where you're going. Need to hide out a while if you do get caught? All of your guildhalls are 100% safe from non-Thieves. You really couldn't ask for a better setup if you want to avoid fighting.
>>I'm glad your combat capabilities are such that any encounter will turn out interesting, but not all of us are as well endowed, or as combative, as all that.
I lose way more fights than I win. I don't fight at the drop of a hat, either, and generally never initiate actual combat. Conflict-driven RP doesn't always have to involve combat, it can often wind up very entertaining for all parties involved, whether someone gets killed or not.
>>I appreciate your position, but I am at a loss as to why you're even arguing against me at this point. I would think someone with those intentions couldn't care less either way.
I'm more stating my own takes on things rather than arguing. But I'm doing it because I want to see more people open up to the idea that conflict can be a fun thing to play out in DR. It's possible to avoid it though, if you really want to. The important part is that you don't get to cherry pick only the conflict you want, that way lies policy-playing and bad RP.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
It doesn't, though. A smart, careful thief who wants to avoid fights can do so far more easily than any other guild I can think of. Khri silence -> go where you're going. Need to hide out a while if you do get caught? All of your guildhalls are 100% safe from non-Thieves. You really couldn't ask for a better setup if you want to avoid fighting.
>>I'm glad your combat capabilities are such that any encounter will turn out interesting, but not all of us are as well endowed, or as combative, as all that.
I lose way more fights than I win. I don't fight at the drop of a hat, either, and generally never initiate actual combat. Conflict-driven RP doesn't always have to involve combat, it can often wind up very entertaining for all parties involved, whether someone gets killed or not.
>>I appreciate your position, but I am at a loss as to why you're even arguing against me at this point. I would think someone with those intentions couldn't care less either way.
I'm more stating my own takes on things rather than arguing. But I'm doing it because I want to see more people open up to the idea that conflict can be a fun thing to play out in DR. It's possible to avoid it though, if you really want to. The important part is that you don't get to cherry pick only the conflict you want, that way lies policy-playing and bad RP.
Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus
>The important part is that you don't get to cherry pick only the conflict you want, that way lies policy-playing and bad RP.
I think that, in the end, that's what this policy is about. Conflict, or don't, but you can't pick and choose.
"Your suffering amuses me" -GM Raesh
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Blunts for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
I think that, in the end, that's what this policy is about. Conflict, or don't, but you can't pick and choose.
"Your suffering amuses me" -GM Raesh
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Blunts for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
