Illarion.org

Fianna Heneghan wrote:I strongly disagree. Adding bitterness to characters you already don't want around will lead to a cycle that will create more complaining and whining in the long run.

I don't think players need any reason to whine, they just do. As for 'bitterness', I see nothing wrong with that. I doubt anyone serious about committing crimes gives a flying smile what you think, much less be bitter! They'll either get even (More RP), or change their behavior to get the 'ban' lifted (more RP). Hmm.....More RP, a good thing....I think.

Look, it's not like irresponsible human guards will ban everyone on sight. If this game is to have 'player' governments, you have to have 'some' trust that they will 'act' responsibly. If they don't, vote them out, or find another town (Same thing players do now).

The Guards IG, need more than 'U R Banned' on the forums. only a 'Newb' would be threatened by that. The only other option is to Jail them. Yeah, that works out very well, right? That's like "Herding" Cats! A Governor already collects taxes, and plans and approves keys, buildings, residents and citizens, etc. It is logical that if he or any of the 'official' Town Guards say "This person is Banned", it should mean something. We need something like this idea as a real 'deterrent'. Something to make the criminals 'think' twice before they act. It will cut down on the 'senseless' crap that happens and give Guards the 'power' to do something besides "Cntrl-Click" or "Come, lets go to the jail, shall we?".

Fianna Heneghan wrote: If you wouldn't want to run the risk of it happening to your character, then I don't think you should suggest it happen to another player's character. I don't think the player controlled guards should be banning anyone otherwise.

We all run risks IG. You can be planting Grain in Greenbriar, and some Orc runs into you and demands food, before he starts eating you! Crap happens, and no amount of 'wishing' or "I wouldn't do that to you!" will prevent that. Players will do what is fun and in character at the time. Few give a "smile" what you do or feel!

All I hope we can do is "curb" banditry, cloudings, thefts, petty crimes with some real consequences, that can be added or removed by "appointed" player offficials of the government. It won't eliminate crime, but it will be a lot rarer! As it should be.

Fianna Heneghan wrote:Anything that is going to lead to less fun and more whining is simply not a good idea, in my opinion. That's the last word I'm going to say on the subject.

I agree. However I believe 'real' power to Ban in the hands of player Guards will help Criminals become more creative, and RP more than just the 'Cntrl-Click'. The Guards won't have to run all over town or beat them to ban them, just issue the spell on them.

What we've done so far doesn't work. Guards get discouraged as more criminals become powergaming Bad-asses with magical swords! They need a way to inflict consequences that don't depend on skill level. A way that can't be beaten out of them or dropped (Criminals will try). And the 'lifting' of the Ban, will promote RP.

Why not give it a try?

Just remember Baby Philosophy: "If it stinks, change it!"

@Fianna: Stop being ridiculous. You act as though criminals are victims "oh noes the mean peoplez are punishing us". No, the criminals committed CRIMES, they didn't HAVE to, and currently there's no way to stop them doing so. People can go on pking sprees or go round robbing everyone and noone can do anything about it because the punishments are useless. Criminals can't just get away with it because you feel the po's of them would be victimised if forbidden from trading and using the depot. If they simply MUST commit crimes in order to have fun in illarion, well then by all means come along and live in Caelum while you're not robbing. TB doesn't HAVE to be the central rp place, it's just a catch 22 that noone can be bothered to do anything about.

I honestly dont think an in-game system will make this better, I think it will make it more frustrating for both the banned people, and the people guards.

Now, perhaps the town governors should communicate between each other, and coordinate their efforts to protect the towns. This way, if a Varshikar Milita member is in Troll's Bane they can assist in keeping outlaws out. This problem could also be solved by recruiting more guards. Perhaps offer incentives for joining the guard / militia? Teach them how to deal with certain situations when outlaws are in the town.

I honestly believe if 5 people confronted an outlaw that was in town that he should leave. It would be bad role-play otherwise, because no matter how strong a person is, I doubt they could take on 5 sword and shield bearing, armor-clad warriors at the same time. Even if they could in engine, I dont think its fair role-play wise to try and take them on. I also believe it is bad role-play for outlaws to just roam towns, without fearing something will happen to them. At least role-play that you are trying to hide your face, or something.

But lets face it, without characters who commit crimes Illarion would be a boring place.

Hushed wrote:Now, perhaps the town governors should communicate between each other, and coordinate their efforts to protect the towns. This way, if a Varshikar Milita member is in Troll's Bane they can assist in keeping outlaws out.

And we forget something important.

Guards are players. Players are people. People have their own life.

Yes it'll be perfect if everyone was online and stuff.

That's why we need guards who are REALLY always there.

ADDED:

Once upon a time, there was a bloke called Stephen Rothman. Silverbrand had the best mining areas, so he and the rest of his gang used to wait until most of silverbrand wasn't there, pop in and mine as much as they want. I believe that they were more than able to beat the militia anyway

The GM's solution was to give silverbrand a pair of super-mega-golems...

Ah well.

Alright, one final word then I really am done.

It sounds to me like the common complaint here is that some players of criminals are not properly roleplaying. If people see this happening in game and say nothing, that is never going to change. Banning characters, jailing them, turning them into frogs or painting them blue will never solve the problem. Those same players will still roleplay badly, the same people will witness it and say nothing then propose changes to the entire game and not address the actual problem.

These kinds of specific complaints have to be handled individually and directly. Addressing a symptom of the problem by enforcing something random on the entire community only punishes the players that are already roleplaying well and will have little or no effect on the ones that are playing badly. It won't fix what's really wrong.

It's really up to each player to raise the level of roleplay by addressing it directly when it fails to meet the standard. Changing the game system to try and correct each facet of bad roleplay will be an never-ending process that will ultimately fail at turning it into good roleplay.

My final two cents.

Fianna Heneghan wrote:Alright, one final word then I really am done.

It sounds to me like the common complaint here is that some players of criminals are not properly roleplaying. If people see this happening in game and say nothing, that is never going to change. Banning characters, jailing them, turning them into frogs or painting them blue will never solve the problem. Those same players will still roleplay badly, the same people will witness it and say nothing then propose changes to the entire game and not address the actual problem.

People do say things. But, when the person isn't breaking the rules with their RP, there is little you can do. It is poor RP to go into town when no guards are online(on purpose) and just rob people because you can, though it isn't against the rules. Laws and rules are the only way to stop unwanted behavior. Talking to people will only get you so far. Those players may not still play poorly if they are playing a different type of character. It is much harder to play certain aligned characters well than others.

I am sure our devs could implement something trivial that serves this purpose, some dirty hack or even a more clean dirty hack. But do we really want this instead of a quicker release of priest magic?

Sure, one can script e.g. a spell or an item that "tags" criminals by using the quest progress array. But such a technical ban would hamper/prevent interesting roleplaying scenes without enabling anything interesting in exchange.

Once, the PO of his Lordship, Edward Cromwell, presented me thoughts about a technical enforced forced labour system. That was much more promising for new RP-aspects, fitting the setting. Giving Eliza a list of persons not to trade with generates no new additional fun IMHO. But e.g. replacing the fitting yet dissatisfying ingame punishment of jailing with forced labour, does.

i like the rune idea... but it would be nice to be able to bribe an npc or guard or what ever to get the bann lifted.. the crime still has a cost and you can still get in to do things but it'd be at extra cost.. and each guard has his price if you cant afford the guard you happen upon then well you go to jail..

also ropes... if thats ever made good and solid that'll help in capturing people too..

as for the npc thing have em over charge the criminals

HeXiS wrote:i like the rune idea... but it would be nice to be able to bribe an npc or guard or what ever to get the bann lifted.. the crime still has a cost and you can still get in to do things but it'd be at extra cost.. and each guard has his price if you cant afford the guard you happen upon then well you go to jail..

also ropes... if thats ever made good and solid that'll help in capturing people too..

as for the npc thing have em over charge the criminals

Hmm....an ex-guard NPC to bribe? I like it. Maybe another 'Thief' NPC like Sylvester?

That would be another 'money-sink', but it would have to be steep, like....50 silvers? Kinda like paying the $50 in Monopoly to get out of Jail!

Be patient, Ropes are coming, but still will be difficult at first until the PO's get good at using it. Plus, there will be 'whining' with that too, since it's like "Technical" forced RP. Be prepared for the complaints.

I also don't believe it will be easy to implement 'overcharging' on marked persons, since item values vary, and will still probably be changed in the future. Having an overall "No sell" function to criminals would be a lot easier I think.

@Esty: I don't think working on this will slow or speed up the druid sytem. Besides, better 'security' in towns and 'fixing' current IG problems seems more important than 'new features' which will have a new set of problems that won't get fixed.

I know the Devs are volunteers, and they fix reported 'bugs' very fast (Thanks!), but could we focus a little more on 'balancing' IG dynamics? Just one among many, this "Guard vs. Criminal" debate has been going a long time. Criminals have fun because they want to for 'selfish' reasons. Guards have fun (or not) to protect others' fun, mostly unselfish. I think 'Guards' should have 'some' help doing that, because they 'help' the game. Not just something the criminals can just cloud them and get from them. (like keys to the Jail, Ropes, etc. - all those have the same 'hack'n'slash solution to counteract them.). I still like 'a' rune system which disables NPC's, Teleporter and the depot of that 'Town' to that 'known' criminal. It's a punishment players will respond to and makes sense that the government would be 'able' to do it. Then RP can start on how to get unbanned, or find ways around it.

Currently, Governments have no power besides keys, Taxes and the cooperation of players to recognize and respect them. Keys and taxes can be stolen and cooperation is not guaranteed. Players who take on the 'thankless' job of running a 'town' and 'leading' the game by their activity (or lack thereof) really should have some 'technical' power over their own city. There's only five, and therefore each one directs 20% of the IG events. I would consider them important gathering places for RP.

Just my opinion.

Hushed wrote:But lets face it, without characters who commit crimes Illarion would be a boring place.

Agreeing fully with this only having one shady character, the rest "good" I would ask if any of this so called "balance" (and the only imbalance I see is NOT game but RP issues) is to occur, please don't overdo it. I actually haven't known any "criminal" who has gotten rich off their crime (not without getting loot from mummies/skele's like all the other fighters). If something is not against the "rules" but just lousy RP, possibly the rules need adjusting to add to the rules for criminal activity that both players have to agree ooc or something similar. I actually play another game this rule is in effect and it hasn't hampered RP at all, both PO's enjoying it.

ANY technically enforced system can hinder the freedom of RP, some is fine and can be worked around, others such has having to carry/hold a bucket unless you "smell like a cow" just seems strange yet dealt with by carrying the perenial bucket.

Some players want less crime, some like the excitement of the possibility and the RP opportunities also. Have a town set up as suggested .... even with the ban on depot but make it ONLY one town if that is what people want. One town with the strict enforcement, the others free of this. Just as a test for a few months, see how much "criminal" RP is in that town alone, and let those chars that want no RP except what they expect related to crafting etc. go to that town if possible to set up. IMO it is likely to be a very boring town.

It is much harder to play certain aligned characters well than others

.. isn't that why we have an application process for fairies etc., why not thieves/bandits?

Changing the game system to try and correct each facet of bad roleplay will be an never-ending process

Sure, one can script e.g. a spell or an item that "tags" criminals by using the quest progress array. But such a technical ban would hamper/prevent interesting roleplaying scenes without enabling anything interesting in exchange.

The best times my chars had ig was related to criminal activity, either robbed, kidnapped or something. Realizing the game engine is there to use balancing out RP, there needs to be a fine line between what exactly IS in the engine versus what a RP game expects as far as it's players. I just hope this engine is not so strict that the freedom of the RP is hampered.

Can someone write down what its all about now. I fail to see me in the need to real 2 sites of long posts to read at the end the ideas that got "rejected" by someone who actually has no real idea of the script sided possibilities.

Nitram

*hopes this is helpful*

Request:

when someone is banned from a town, they should not be able to use the NPC's of that town.

added to request:

they should also not be able to use the depot to that town for as long as the ban.

other posts:

arguements for and against, mostly against not being able to use the depot rather then the NPC's.

_____________________________

Suggestions on how to script and who in town would be able to implement the ban are posted including an idea to use runes to ban.

______________________________

An added idea is the ability to "bribe" in order to get the ban lifted sooner.

"Mostly against"?

Into English that means "I argued against", there were more responders than complainers.

Alex, in case you are able to come up with anything usefull, feel free to do. In case you are not, like now, you should just remain silent.

The idea is interessting after all, while the proposals how to realize it are more or less unusable.

Nitram

I heard that at one point there was a spell casted over Trolls bane to keep all those who intend evil out. I don't know how it was scripted, nor how it worked, all I know is, that it was there at one point. Is it possible to use this script and work it that way to at least keep out the major ones who are banned and constantly keep coming back because they know that no one can stop them when there are 3 other people online?

That "spell" contained dozens of small scripts and even then it was not completly working.

And it worked only against predefined characters.

Nitram

I have very mixed feelings about this. On the other hand it could be useful for major "open" hubs as trollsbane, on the other hand it would allow griefing at an unprecedented technical scale as well as allow further fortification and stagnation with already "closed" settlements. Silverbrand or Goldburg hardly has any use for this, as only Silverbranders and Goldburgers can enter the settlements anyway.

If anything:

Disabling depots will not prevent the persons involved from entering the town and causing havoc as they please (which is a much more pressing concern, imo) but would rather just enable the guards to bully those who cannot kick the guard's asses. Nobody will ban Dain Laiden or Nalcaryos von Weisshafen because they'll be in a world of hurt until the depots are accesable again.

However, if (I use trollsbane as an example) 'npc guards' both 1.) prevent people from entering the town and 2.) patrol the streets to look for people who might have teleported in, the system might be useful to a degree. It could still be abused, but at least it could also help in keeping the banned people 'out'.

Of course, the system should not be flawless. Banned people should still have the chance to try and enter the town.
Their chance for success could be dependant on such factors as :
1.) Day/Night
2.) Clothes/armor (Heavily armored person would come under more scrutiny)
3.) The amount/type of weapons
4.) Random factor

Unarmed, cloth-dressed man sneaking into the town at night. (50%)
A man with sword and dagger, sneaking into the town at night. (40%)
A man dressed in a full plate set, carrying a ton of weapons, trying to enter during night. (10%)

If you lower those chances by 50% for the duration of day..

How it would work? The chances would be re-set after each IG day for the banned people. If they fail, they must wait for 3 RL hours (or whatever the amount of time for an IG day is) before they can attempt entering again. If they are successful, they get to enter the town as normal. However, as they exit and attempt to re-enter, the chances are checked again (with a normal chance of failing).

I like that idea, but it has been mentioned numerous times and never been enstated. But eh, what can you do besides either nag the devs or buy them all a new sports car.

Dantagon Marescot wrote:I like that idea, but it has been mentioned numerous times and never been enstated. But eh, what can you do besides either nag the devs or buy them all a new sports car.

Well, how about being a bit more patient? Sure, there are some ideas which are maybe quite good. Bute technically it's often not that easy to realize them as it might look to those who don't have to do the work for it. I'm sure, the devs do their best to check out what has a certain use for the fun and atmosphere and could be realized without more work needed than it's worth.

Please don't forget they are all people with a normal real life, too and do that all for nothing besides the hope to keep the "wheels turning" and a little "thank you" from time to time. And as every human being they need motivation to do all this. And nagging around all the time won't motivate them much.

Besides that, I'm sure they would be happy about getting a new sports car anyway


Now to the proposonal:

I like the idea. But unfortunately I have no idea how it could be realized atm. I guess a kind of interface would be needed which allows to define the "banned" chars without needing a GM everytime to do it. But that is exactly what I think is not possible to realize. And even if it was, it could be easily abused.

Mr. Cromwell wrote:Nobody will ban Dain Laiden or Nalcaryos von Weisshafen because they'll be in a world of hurt until the depots are accessible again.

That's like saying "Let's give in to terrorist demands or they might bomb us". If they don't give in, people like this will eventually stop the pking sprees and be cooperative. Just need to teach them like children, you ban them from the depots for a week, they go on a spree, you add another week, then 2 weeks, then a month until they learn.

AlexRose wrote:

Mr. Cromwell wrote:Nobody will ban Dain Laiden or Nalcaryos von Weisshafen because they'll be in a world of hurt until the depots are accessible again.

That's like saying "Let's give in to terrorist demands or they might bomb us". If they don't give in, people like this will eventually stop the pking sprees and be cooperative. Just need to teach them like children, you ban them from the depots for a week, they go on a spree, you add another week, then 2 weeks, then a month until they learn.

Uhm, Dain hasn't been on a killing spree in over two months. I fixed the quote for you.

AlexRose wrote:

Mr. Cromwell wrote:Nobody will ban Leva Beliu or Ayla To'lorn because they'll be in a world of hurt until the depots are accessible again.

As for the whole bribeable NPC guard, I'm against it, why can't you just bribe on of the player guards, who's to say that every one of them is a paragon of justice?[/i]

Logrin Parr wrote: As for the whole bribeable NPC guard, I'm against it, why can't you just bribe on of the player guards, who's to say that every one of them is a paragon of justice?[/i]

Because most of them are in the mindset of "I'm the most brave, knightly, hero ever in the world! I'm the definition of King Arthur. " or there are ones that could be bribed that really hold no importance at all. I remember when Dain and Julius were outlaws. They didn't need bribes.