A plea to take a chance (discussing PvP, thieves, etc)

If you check back, Mugly Wumple has said that he wasn't serious about that remark.

The thing is, a lot of people took him seriously, which I think is wrong.

 

If you lose all your gear, it will slow you down. Lose all your gear often enough, you might reconsider being a thief. The thing to avoid is the UO 'naked thief' syndrome. When you die, there needs to be consequences for your actions, so perhaps thieves should have a minimum gear requirement to be capable of stealing.

 

A smart thief only wears what they must, so I see your reasoning, but being forced to wear a certain amount of clothes would either have no effect, or be really frustrating. After all, clothes will likely be fairly inexpensive, and I can't imagine why there would be a requirement to steal as grand as needing some valuable garment. Naked thief syndrome is a good point to raise. The condition is a direct result of there being too little punishment for dying (that and people spawning unclothed). City Jails anyone?

 

Jails have been mentioned, but I dislike game driven punishments, and prefer that players provide their own justice. Perhaps to discourage the naked thief syndrome, when a thief dies, a fine could be imposed with funds deducted directly from their bank account if the gear they have on them doesn't serve to pay their 'debt to society', but I don't care all that much for that approach either. The lesser of two evils (or many evils), it is still an evil.

I am open to suggestion on this subject.

 

I think that to accomplish the goal of punishing thieves, some degree of game driven punishment will be needed in combination with some player driven punishment. Leaving things entirely up to the players is very similar to UO's casual criminal approach. The result was that thieving wasn't dangerous. Anyway, what do you dislike about jailing players? An aside: I like the idea of thieves who are killed being instantly ressed but moved to jail. That way, dying is what is connected to punishment, not simply getting caught.

 

I dislike jails because then the game is punishing the player, rather than have players punish that player. In another example of player justice, if a murderer is killed and dry looted, that was done by another player, and until the murder gets resurrected and reequipped, they are combat ineffective, which not only imposes a financial penalty for their crimes, but also renders them helpless for a period of time.

In the case of the naked thief, there isn't a similar process. They can die, but they can just res again instantly and keep dieing/resing until they successfully steal something and get away without being killed. That is a pathological game design that needs be corrected. One reason this was such a problem in UO was that your gray status as a criminal wore off after something like two minutes, so a career thief could just wait two minutes, become 'innocent' and then blend in with the population, which was a ridiculous state of affairs for very well known thieves, but until they flagged themselves again, you couldn't attack them without becoming a criminal yourself.

I think the best way to manage this is to have a persistent criminal state, just like there should be a persistent murderer state. That way, no one would be a naked thief because as soon as you see the gray naked guy, everyone unloads on them. A thief should always expect combat, so they should be geared up for combat, and upon death, they incur the same penalties as a murderer for their chosen path.

The question now as far as the game design goes, what would a player have to do to merit a persistent status as a criminal, and how could they reverse that status, and repay their debt to society?

 

The persistent criminal state is, admittedly, a game driven punishment, but it may still be the best option. I recall long after I stopped playing on OSI, I found persistent criminal states on UO free servers which would deceptively color your name blue until someone attacked you (assuming you were a thief). Those were ideal because they were more gentle on new thieves who had only stolen an item here and there, but also very hard on infamous thieves (who found themselves often getting aos'd (not age of shadows) despite having a blue name.

The progression of the stealing skill has been discussed elsewhere, but it is worth mentioning that persistent criminal states probably wouldn't apply except to thieves which have gained the ability to steal from human players.

 

In UO, if you stole from a blue NPC, you were still flagged as a criminal, but you could steal from brigands and humanoid monsters and not get flagged, and so you could develop your stealing skills without being flagged as a criminal. In towns, I think that is only correct, in that towns should be safe mostly because if you become flagged as a criminal in town, everyone, including guards, can kill you on sight.

 

It is not a punishment until you are punished, which should come at the hands of another player. Being flagged as a criminal is an accurate reflection of your actions in game.

 

The way I experienced persistent criminal states, was through joining the thief's guild (that way, for better or worse, everyone who had the capacity to steal from someone else was always a criminal). Are you suggesting that the persistent criminal state should be a player driven punishment?

 

A criminal state should result from criminal acts. Stealing from brigands or humanoid monsters is not a criminal act any more than killing them should be, and there will be a whole lot of killing of NPC villains in SotA. I can raise my skill at stealing from such NPCs (or criminal players for that matter) without becoming a criminal myself. Once I actually commit a crime, stealing from an 'innocent' (however that is defined), that is a criminal act that should flag me as a criminal.

Now we need to decide on how persistent that state should be. Two minutes is too short, obviously, but maybe a first time offender should be shown some leniency. This is a matter for further debate.

 

Well I don't think the first steal ever (from an innocent) should yield much more than a two minute timer, however as you steal more, the timer increase should be closer to an exponential rate than a linear rate. That way, any famous thief is pretty much a criminal for life. This rate should make it so that naked thief syndrome can persist only for a handful of robberies (somewhere around 3 I'm thinking). After that point, higher rates, restrictive of NTS should start showing up. After that, it would only take another handful of steals before exponential growth would lead to very severe penalties. Anyone who has broken a certain threshold of robberies should also be required to do something beyond just waiting to become innocent again (such as paying a fee).

This may be dangerous, but being able to pay down your hours of persistent criminal state would be a useful and realistic way of rejoining the lawful community. While this would be nice for people who want to come clean (and for rich people who want to buy a few privileges), this could be exploited if the gold-inflation rates are too high (not to mention players are creative when it comes to abuse).

 

In a game based upon the Virtues, buying your way out of being a criminal is too much like buying indulgences to get you into Heaven. Redemption shouldn't be gained by a pocketbook solution. Perhaps a difficult quest line that involves sacrifice and service to others, which should be difficult while flagged. I'll have to give that one some thought.

 

You're right.
Mugly, I apologize!

 

Actually, upon reading Mugly's post again, I think he was serious, but recanted when he started getting strong push back. I do compliment Mugly for changing his mind, and admitting that would be a bad idea.

 

Wow. Those are some extreme measures.

I assume that since players that steal would be taking on enourmous risk in your system of justice, you would be in favor of allowing thieves to steal anything in the game, right?

Oops, I read more and realized too late that you weren't being serious. That's what I get for not reading the entire thread.

 

Don't forgive Mugly too quickly. I think he was entirely serious in his first post, and there are plenty of others who subscribe to that theory any way. Mugly, to his credit, recanted after getting some serious pushback.

 

I'm currently of the opinion that stealing from fellow players is a form of PvP interaction. If that is true, then players setting to non-PvP, "friends of friends only" type postures on whatever form the slider eventually takes, will be immunized against theft. If that is the case, then there will be a way for anyone who WANTS to play this game, but would be effectively dissuaded from doing so by the potential of being robbed, to play the game on acceptable terms. If I'm right, then that really solves the entire problem of the community discussing ways of controlling thieves. Many players will actively seek to play in an open community environment where theft is possible, they will steal from each other, catch and punish each other, and enjoy the entire process. Many others will opt for a "thief free environment", and not think of themselves as being in any way restricted, or their game play as being in any way inferior, and both play styles and player populations will serve to support the further existence and development of SotA.

As long as it isn't forced on those unwilling to experience it, or banned from those who came to the game seeking it.

 

While I mostly agree with you, there's likely a number of players that like open PvP but can't stand player looting and thieving (which I tend to see as mostly the same), and on top of that how thieving and player looting works needs to be calibrated anyway if they are to exist.

 

I have to disagree with you Strider. The art of thievery requires a theft and an escape, allowing the victim to take chase. Usually only one item is taken at a time, unless your afk in an open pvp environment. Then you should be killed and looted anyway. You being dead and looted dry by the person who killed you is a not the same. So Open PvP should be a free zone to steal out of your backpack at will, then let you take chase after your precious shiny item I just relieved you of. Then if you do catch and kill me then my backpack and items within are forfeit.

Whats your main concern? Losing armor and weapons or the potion in your backpack that gives you that helpful edge in combat?

Because if thieves get their way (which i hope they do) your precious drop you got will soon be in my hot little hands as I high tail it to my nearest fence.

I'm open for potential options for an Open PvP looting system, so long as you don't retract from my backpack snooping escapades.