Thieves automatically flagged PVP - news from telethon

So an idea that was put out was that if you are caught stealing multiple times from npcs scenes (shops/etc) and they catch you, they will warn you twice, then call guards. Rather than the guards taking action on you, they will instead put a bounty on you and flag you a thief (which is a pvp flag), that other players will then enforce mob justice on to claim.

Now after the initial outrage, my thought is, under what conditions can this idea be made ok?
Meaning, I get the feeling we're stuck with this no matter what, so I tried thinking what way it could be put in that would make it suck the least.

I mean i see what they're trying to accomplish, so is there a middleground that makes it work?

Here's my thoughts:

Idea 1 - Pvp oriented
1. You must be caught by an npc stealing things 3 times within some time period (in-game day or week?), such that thievings decay, so one or two accidental caughts every so often doesn't screw you.
2. Upon the third catch, you are assigned the thief pvp flag, and your bounty amount (starting at 0) is increased.
3. The Thief PVP flag does not allow you to pickpocket others, nor will it award an exp loss on death, nor you losing any ransom. So the only thing the thief experiences is the death. Likewise, anyone a thief kills in defense drops no ransom.
4. The person who collects the ransom recieves no items except the bounty, and has an option to spare the thief in return for a lesser bountyand a virtue bonus. Instead of a death, the thief suffers a debuff(tbd).
5. The bounty decays at some rate(over a few days), and also has a maximum growth rate (to prevent friend farming). So if no one collects the bounty in a few days, the thief goes free.

Idea 2 - Everyone oriented
1. Same as idea 1
2. Upon the third catch, you are assigned the thief duel flag, and your bounty amount (starting at 0) is increased.
3. People can gain a quest from any guard (arrest warrant), about any thieves in the nearby area. You must have the warrant for the thief.
4. The thief duel flag forces you to accept any warrant duel you are challenged to, preventing surprise attacks and giving you a 3 second warning to fight/run. This can be explained in-game as a person reading a warrant of arrest.
5. If the person serving the warrant wins the duel, the thief does not die, but is put into a nearby jail for a short time period (3-5 minutes) in which they have the option to play some minigame to reduce time. (this can be a 3-5 min debuff in the short term until this content is created).
6. The warrant gets marked completed, and can turned back into the guard for the bounty reward.
7. If the thief wins 3 warrant duels in a row, the warrant is invalidated.

While it's still not ideal, i think one of these two may be an allowable compromise between "I don't want to suffer to give other people content" and "my choices should have meaningful actions".

In summary:

idea 1: Pvp flag so normal ganks/surprises/hunting harassing, but no item loss risk to thief or to hunter, still is inconvenience to die. Also allows virtue spare.
Idea 2: Duel flag, so no surprise attacks however more time penalty to thief beyond just dying.

Common ideas to both: Thief flag is not permanent, can wear off.

 

I like the idea. Anything that gives interest and variety to the game, and also adds a bit of "realism", is good. Some people are already crying that we don't execute people for stealing from a house, but they're silly; a few hours/days of PvP mode (or until PvP-related death) is a perfect slap on the wrist.

Let the good be good, and the bad be bad!

 

Should I not be choosing to PvP because it is fun, not be compelled to accept it as a slap on the wrist 'punishment', in a game?

 

Honestly cannot wrap my head around the grammar of first segment of sentence, can you rephrase?

EDIT: OH ok I re-read it...strange sentence, but totally correct. No games are 100% freedom. Your request for freedom from game features is like someone playing Quake requesting not to be shot. Or someone playing Pac-Man and requesting no ghosts because...I dunno, they're afraid of ghosts or something.

All games have rules. In this game, there are some rules. To craft food, you have to have food ingredients. Why not be able to craft food without food ingredients? Cuz rules. Following rules and getting rewards (or punishments, have it as you like) IS video gaming.

I want to play asteroids, but I want the game to work where they only explode if I shoot in the OPPOSITE direction. Silly request, you say? Well I think your request is silly. If you want a game where you can steal and are not punished with danger, go bloody well play one.

This is all very, very simple. ;-)

EDIT: what?

 

Enforcement of game laws are best done by the game, not by handing it over to player or mob 'justice' - the town guards, the oracle, the NPC 'victims' and the virtues systems should contain the appropriate levels of 'punishment' for breaking their rules. Making players who have no skill in PvP or any wish to participate be targets for players who ARE into pvp simply slaughter them - might as well just have the old UO system where guards autokill you, the end result will be the same - characters killed without a hope of survival is simply never going to be any sort of fun except for the bizarrely masochistic.

 

Punished or penalised for the theft, fine - killed by other players 'because they can' .... not fine. PKing is NOT the only option that can be applied.

 

Wait...so you want certain death at the hands of NPC guards or the Oracle, but not possible death at the hands of another player? I smell extremely sour grapes.

 

Here's the interesting bit that took me a while to think about. Hence why I liked option 2 myself.
With the duel mechanic, you actually get to do a more realistic thief experience. Run, Hide, don't fight. Use stealth. Use escape skills. Use caltrops.

For those who haven't duel'd, there's a countdown of sorts to give you some warning. So even if a player finds you and reads your warrant, you can't be caught unaware while hunting mobs for example and killed before you can react.
You get a warning before the fight even starts if they manage to sneak up on you, but if you keep your wits about you they won't even get close.

You get the benefit of a real risk (having to be careful/wary) without the risk of death (if they win the duel you just get a non-pvp punishment (jail). So really instead of pvp, it's just more intelligent guards chasing you because a player is playing the part of the guard.

To me, in the way i'm viewing it, it's not much functionally different from the viewpoint of the thief, than just saying "if a guard npc at speed 150% catches up to you, then rolls 20 or lower on a d100, you get into jail" in terms of time loss, but to me would feel a lot more fun, espceially if you are particularly a skilled thief who is good at running/hiding.

So it's "pvp" in that the pk'er plays the part of the npc guard, and uses pvp skills, but has a pve result/penalty that isn't death. The only difference is that your assailant isn't a mindless npc, but a thinking player. The pvp'er gets the rewarding fight of pvp/hunt, the pve'er doesn't suffer the pvp penalties but suffers game aspect penalties from their thievery.

As I said, they're just my two initial thoughts i've been mulling over all afternoon. I was just trying to think of some way to combine aspects where the pvp side feels rewarded while the pve side gets a challenge that isn't just a slaughterfest that just ruins their day.

 

No, I do not want either - both are equally obnoxious, and I see no especial difference between the two.

 

So many other options exist than a straight 'fight to the death over a piece of deco' though. NPCs could charge you more for services since they distrust you, or not deal with you at all, some services in towns might become unavailable because your reputation in the place is so bad, so many possibilities that seem much more engaging, sensibe and dare I say it fun and reasonably realistic than 'die and lose XP/items (as I assume there is at least some such penalty for death, or the whole thing becomes utterly pointless - though the skill loss system might nicely represent you spending time in a 'jail' for the crime) . Fighting back by trying to escape, use tactics like caltrops and so on woudl decrease your reputation even further, and trigger 'stronger' levels of 'social exclusion' by the game world. Making you a target for another player is the least impressive way I can think of to handle it, and surely we all know that if there are places where especially in-demand stealables are found, someone is going to simply camp them to kill the 'thieves'?

 

I'm not sure if either one is a good idea, but being a bounty hunter sounds pretty fun.

 

It really sounds like you didn't read my post at all.

In option 1, there would be a death, but no exp/item loss. The death itself is a punishment. And the bounty hunter could spare the thief (reduce to 1 hp vs kill) for some extra virtue points.
The death/time lost to fighting would be penalty enough (i mean you're stealing an item worth a few gp, the punishment doesn't need to be much to be in balance).

In option 2 it's a duel, so again, no death. The jail service would be the punishment. And the jail service could be done any number of interesting story oriented ways.

I mean it may just be me, but the anxiety/fear/time running would be punishment enough to balance out the gain from being able to steal. Remember, in addition to all this you still take your thievery virtue hit. So that's two punishments to balance it out.

 

I did, honestly - please bear in mind it's 5AM here and I was referring to the initial Portalarium idea of rathe than your thoughts, sorry if I was unclear.

 

If you did something like #2 you would also have the option of only giving the bounty quest for someone to players within a similar level range. That would make for more competitive fights, and it's not that strange that an npc might want to assign stronger avatars to tougher tasks.

 

Would the thief loose their negative marks if they die or loose their the dual so they don't have to die over and over?

 

So what are guards for in the cities if they don't do anything? Decoration?
Another blow against the "single player narrative" and selective multiplayer and another sign that SotA has become a PvP MMORPG.

 

So this is the problem with any system that involves flagging you for PVP because you stole something for the NPC.

SPO/FO

So what happens in those modes? Do you get forced into MPO? Your Ideas are good for a true MMO that is PVP based but this was to be a story driven game with sandbox options. Yes I know it has moved on from that but my point is why are we forcing PVP on people for interacting with NPC. If the NPC dislikes you because of stealing have a system in game to deal with it not make the other players deal with it for you. This is a cop out of the devs to not write or take into account other people breaking in game laws and having actions based on those actions.

 

I do like your ideas Umuri. However I am strongly opposed to force flagging player thieves (of npc deco items).
Personally I believe play styles are too different and it will only create bad blood and potential for grieving and abuse.
Misdemeanor/ crime in PvE should be handled through the game (I.e guards putting you into jail or fining you, merchants stopping to trade etc) and not by people that derive their game joy from fighting (or worse killing) other players characters.

Options like the one you describe Umuri are good but I don't trust Pirtalarium has the resources or intention to install anything like this.

 

They could make the vendors get upset and charge you a premium on any item you want to buy. That would work in both MMO and SPO. Since stealing is a social effect have it effect how the NPCs interact with you.

 

I don't think that many people care about SPO and FPO anymore with all of those changes - not to speak about the unloved stepchild offline mode... SotA finally has changed - there is next to nothing left from the Kickstarter idea...

The ship to Neverland has sailed, people booked passage and paid for the trip but on the way the course was changed 180 degrees....