Cannibalism Game Mechanics, pt. 1 of 2

As these items are literally of no worth to their owner (you cannot harvest from yourself, after all), I would propose that ransom not be involved for them. It would be no different than finding a resource in the wild (just a wee bit bloodier, though).

This will likely be addressed in part 2, but I'm no economist. That is something that I will put in the hands of the development team, as they have much more information about the game's infrastructure on hand than I do. Body parts would be expensive, I can say that much.

As far as keeping the market out of the public eye, I've already alluded to that in the document. Players will have to go to these places to acquire these "components." Trading them while in a city is subject to any justice system that the developers draw up. If you ask me, I think they should be kicked out of the city's limits, have the items confiscated, be fined, and acquire "points" that lead to greater civic penalties.

But, again, I don't know how they plan to run the economy, and I don't know how they intend to implement a justice system, so I purposefully stayed away from those two areas.

Glad to have you on board! I, too, had thought that would fit in nicely with LB's smuggling quests.

And yes, that would certainly be a huge market -- a lot of harvestable components would tie directly into darker spellcasting, alchemy, crafting (devious tinker traps?), and the like.

 

I want the animation to be a toggle!!! If someone is going to chop me up-- I want the choice to see it!!! Otherwise every death will leave me WONDERING!!!

To me the visuals are important-- I would like to see the EVIL character hunched over eating right off the corpse!!! If they CHOOSE!!!

Toggle it off and it looks like rummaging!!!

 

I like this as an option.

 

@Retro: You mean like.. decorating your yard? Trading with your party?

@crossbowsoda: If there's no ransom then how do you opt out of being turned into jerky? Give up PvP?

I'm not on board even in jest.. but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the effort to think through and address potential problems with an idea. Even if it's one I don't agree with.

Here's a problem I see with creating a market. More players will be encouraged to harvest parts from random people. Meaning PvPers who don't want to be jerky would have to opt out of PvP if there's no other way.

In terms of reagents. If there's alternates that do the same thing then why bother having 2?

 

Well, you don't opt out.

You are, by default, opted out of having your name on anything.

Your corpse is opted out of showing any signs of tampering.

For all intents and purposes, you are totally unaffected.

If you or anyone else witnesses a PC or NPC in the act of defiling your corpse (the only way it could possibly be known by anyone that it had even happened) and it bugs you a bit? Report them to NPCs & PCs who would be interested in turning that player into a corpse.

Not enough? We can probably work out a compromise.

Not sure what you're getting at here.. Please rephrase?

This feature isn't limited to usage against PvP players. It can be used on anyone.

However, using it on another player does result in flagging and other consequences.

It has been alluded to that the 'darker' reagents would do the same thing, yes, but noticeably better (maybe even have additional effects?). They may unlock spells other reagents cannot.

Again: this is for part 2.

 

And it tastes like chicken too!

 

Basically what you end up with is people harvesting body parts for profit just because they can. Several people have started they'd opt out of PvP entirely to get away from this stuff and it sounds like these ideas being put forth are giving them no other options.

I can also see people running around town shouting "human hearts for sale!" if they can't sell them on vendors. It would be pretty hard to guard against.. if a particular phrase calls the guards they'll just change a letter or something and be safe. Players wouldn't be able to do anything but put them on ignore which is annoying in itself to have to do. Next day they're buddy will be walking through town doing the shouting.

 

Moving to game features / skills as it seems to apply.

 

And...? People roam the wilderness and do whatever they please because they can... I think the idea is to afford us a level of freedom and have us determine if the consequences are appropriate.

As far as people being opposed to this specific proposal, I'd need to see their specific complaints. Please message them to me and I'll try to figure out a solution.

Again, this is more a problem of player behavior rather than a problem with the ideas I've brought forth.

A player can run around town shouting they're a cookie monster.

They can run around town trying to sell Mondain's underwear.

They can run around and do whatever they please. If you have a problem with them, then your problem is with their behavior and not the aspect of the game that they're abusing.

I don't know that you can be penalized for saying anything in town... even plotting to kill somebody. The point is that trading it in town is problematic.

 

The difference is they actually WILL be selling body parts. These ideas promote and legitimize the behavior and the more people involved the more "in your face" it's going to be. You won't be able to keep it out of towns or otherwise isolated to the people who want to be involved.

 

Unless having human meat on your person is considered by the law similar to holding contraband... and there's some justice system where if you have contraband on your person you have to watch your back... if not from other players (on quests etc), then also from guards, and maybe from agents of justice that are undercover and ask you if you have the human meat on your person before they try to arrest you..

In fact, it would be interesting to discuss a more general bounty system in conjunction with such a contraband system.

 

Having read this proposal, do you now intend to cannibalize others? The proposal was certainly 'in your face.'

Still, I'd assume not. You don't seem the type.

Now, with that in mind, why do you believe that others would immediately jump to do so? The consequences are severe. I would wager that for as many people that are interested in this, there are as many (if not more) interested in righteously slaying them.

The idea isn't to isolate it: the idea is to spur players to explore places they otherwise wouldn't go, do things they wouldn't do, associate with archetypes they'd have avoided, etc.

The idea is to promote actual decision-making, to promote a diverse group of roleplaying characters. It could actually give players who want to be a little evil something of a release, and give players who want to be paragons of good something to fight against.

If you are going to continue to challenge the ideas behind this, I'd ask that you please abandon your argument's moral positioning so that the discussion can be carried forward logically.

 

Then they just wouldn't keep it on their person. Have it in storage someplace.

 

Now you're thinking like a cannibal...

 

1) Yep, it would most certainly be contraband. I think that simple things like hair may fly (even in present day, that is not illegal) in public.

2) You know, it makes sense that these things would give off a noticeable scent that alerts others...

This absolutely fits in with the contraband system!

(Added to pages 2 & 9 on 5/21/2014, credit: redfish)

 

Remember, this would flag players for PVP!!! So while the person is yelling, "HEARTS FOR SALE" they are also advertising, "come to my storage shed and gank me please!".

I would rather hear that than an add for GOLD SELLING!!! ANY DAY!!!

This COULD play into contraband!!! Then be SMUGGLED for any number of EVIL creatures giving quests to do their bidding!!!

 

My current arguments have nothing to do with moral positioning. You should recognize that. Knowing full well that this is a huge turn off for a lot of players and ergo not something that's necessarily going to have a huge support amongst the majority is something that needs to be considered. Ignoring that is simply bad design.. particularly when it's being flaunted in front of them by other players on a regular basis.

You should be thinking about how to allow people to opt out and still enjoy some good ol' PvP. You don't want to isolate cannibalism from those who want to opt out? Then you're discouraging people from PvP which is the opposite of what Portalarium wants to do. If I know I'm going to end up as body parts if I PvP.. then I'm just not going to. I would have otherwise. Others have said as much in other threads and in past discussions. That's the first decision you're prompting people to make.. PvP and be harvested parts.. or don't PvP.

You want to promote RP? I hate to break it to you but your average player is not a role player.. People will be harvesting parts just because they think being evil makes them look tough and they make a profit towards that new shiney armor they've been drooling over. So what you say? I thought you guys didn't want to trivialize the idea? But the more you promote it and say "so?" the more trivialized it's going to be.

"Good" players don't NEED anything more to fight against. Just having PvPers out there looking for a fight is enough.

If you're unwilling to acknowledge how your ideas will interact with player behavior than what you're going to end up with is something that sounds good on paper but will never work they way you intend. Players will find every hole.. every exploit.. every work around. They're not going to play with the mindset you think they should either.

 

No I've just seen how players behave over many long years. If there's a way around something they'll take it. If getting ganked is a concern.. that's what guild mates are for. You think these people are all going to be soloist?

 

I think the majority wants cannibalism.

 

At the inception of this project, I'd noticed something in the previous thread: that the people who were opposed to cannibalism (seemed like a minority from what I'd read) seemed opposed to the humiliation that the old system offered... their body parts strewn all over the place, their corpses being reduced to a stack of bones, seeing their own head (with their name on it) on the ground.. or that people were able to decorate their houses with the named parts of others even in guarded areas.

So, I set out to make a more tame system. You have been the only person to disagree with it thus far (the negative end of cannibalism has even been called excessive by some of my peers), and you've regularly changed your position. You've abandoned entire arguments at the drop of a hat, while you maintained the belief (yes, belief) that cannibalism is wrong, only to adopt another argument. So, yeah, you seem either morally or superstitiously opposed whether you are or are not.

In this system, players will not even know that they've been cannibalized unless they see it happening with their own eyes, in which case they have a variety of options to pursue some form of justice against the offender. So, if you don't see it happening, and you don't notice the effects, and it's even made the game harder for the offender... what does it matter?

The idea here is that it's not PvP-only. Every player, even when PvEing, can be subject to cannibalism if they die. Do you want me to change that? To date, you'd be the only person to suggest it. As it's implemented, I suppose others have seen no point in changing it since it really doesn't affect anybody.

Is it worth it to cannibalize every player's corpse? No, because being seen comes with extremely harsh consequences. For the amount of time it'll take, it'll likely be pretty hard to avoid being seen unless you're deep in the wild. Even so, cannibalizing a player leaves you PvP-eligible (which I imagine lasts a while). Do you feel these consequences aren't harsh enough? Just say so. I'll come up with something.

I cannot stress this enough: this system is focused so heavily on removing the humiliation from the old way of doing it, that most players won't even know it's happened. It even favors the victim in the event that the offender is caught, allowing them to basically recruit members of justice to exact their revenge (keeping the player from having to do it themselves if they don't want to).

This sort of ties into my earlier point... this is based on player behavior, and not the game mechanic. People may kill ogres and teabag them because it makes them feel tough, so why even say something like this? There's nothing that can keep players from behaving how they want. The point is moot.

Right, so if they find every hole and every exploit, then they'll find every hole and every exploit, and then they'll find every hole and exploit... that is not an appropriate argument.

RG & his team are trying to build a fantastic roleplaying world: does this mean that all players will roleplay? No. I'd wager a lot of them won't.
Will people abuse the system? Yes. I'm sure a lot will.

I've DMed plenty of tabletop games, making them as sandboxy as possible. I know how players tend to act. I lay the groundwork, and the players run with it. That is the extent of my control. Limiting the freedom of players is not a solution.