Illarion.org

unless you have an army bans are almost a joke.....but if one guilty of a crime is ghosted.....does the town have the right to give that person on the first visit to the cross 30pcs of copper and escourt that person to a teleporter, and if the person refuses ... ghost them again and prevent them from using the town cross... effectively banning them

miru

In my opinion, Bans are a 'polite' way of saying "what you did was wrong, and if you don't mend your ways, It will be worse".

I wouldn't call them a joke, just giving the person a second chance. Bans work for the most part. It's the few that laugh at Bans that ruin this 'honor' system. But they get ghosted soon anyways.

BTW, you could give 30 cp to whoever you wish, but 'Ghosting without proper RP and emotes prior edges upon rules violations and multikilling. Don't do it.

Also, I don't believe 'blocking' a cross is even allowed. If I was a GM, I'd come down hard on anyone preventing a Ghost reaching a cross. Sorry.

i was asking ..... ifit is not possible then we live with most bans ignored ...so be it ....thank you for your promt reply

miru

Miru wrote:unless you have an army bans are almost a joke.....but if one guilty of a crime is ghosted.....does the town have the right to give that person on the first visit to the cross 30pcs of copper and escourt that person to a teleporter, and if the person refuses ... ghost them again and prevent them from using the town cross... effectively banning them

miru

... WOO LET'S GIVE CRIMINALS MONEY!

You can't FORCE someone to pick up money or type "Trolls Bane". And it's a stupid idea anyway. And this is an ig matter not ooc.

Well, if nothing works and city guards are ignored, we'll need a special NPC and an execution device with the scripted function to permanently delete executed Chars.

This also implies executing 'good' chars, by the 'bad' guys, I guess. hehe

Not really, since the good guys don't go into other towns and rob, kidnapp or kill chars. The bad ones do. so it is not the same. tghe roleplay of bad or evil chars is not common. it is uncommon and should be not seen as standart. so doing such roleplay is also having greater impacts on the average roleplay since it means disadvantage for the average char, the good char. so if a evil char commits again and again crimes, without stopping or learning from jailtimes and punishments, a perma death is more sensefull then for a good char doing nothing extra ordinairy that disturbs average roleplay.

You really should think different from bad chars then good chars. they are not the same. playing evil or criminal simply means to accept more possible harsh treatments and outcomes for his char then with other roles played.

True, usually i cannot think of any culture where they executed those who followed the laws and were nice to other people.
Tyrants of course executed random people they didn't like.
But usually there's a difference between punishing players who ignore other RP and logical ig authorities to an amount where their return-from-cross-habits become annoying and disturbing, and punishing random players, which would also be a kind of mistake

Samantha Meryadeles wrote:Not really, since the good guys don't go into other towns and rob, kidnapp or kill chars. The bad ones do. so it is not the same.

I think you missed Ava's point.

He was talking about the Evil Characters possibly kidnapping and executing Good or average characters if Damien's idea was implemented.

I think it's a good point, that a 'perma-death solution for criminals could be twisted around and used likewise on good characters. It's a double-edged solution.

Just goes to show, be careful what you wish for.

Juniper Onyx wrote:

Samantha Meryadeles wrote:Not really, since the good guys don't go into other towns and rob, kidnapp or kill chars. The bad ones do. so it is not the same.

I think you missed Ava's point.

He was talking about the Evil Characters possibly kidnapping and executing Good or average characters if Damien's idea was implemented.

I think it's a good point, that a 'perma-death solution for criminals could be twisted around and used likewise on good characters. It's a double-edged solution.

Just goes to show, be careful what you wish for.

I don't like the idea of forced perma kills.

Samantha Meryadeles wrote:So if a evil char commits again and again crimes, without stopping or learning from jailtimes and punishments, a perma death is more sensefull then for a good char doing nothing extra ordinairy that disturbs average roleplay.

I don't understand, Patric, why you consider evil chars are bad roleplay...

I agree, some are -really- bad roleplayers, and play brutes, dull, bash 'n kill types of characters, rather than evil.
The kind of characters that throw flameballs at everyone while hidden under a 'dark hood', yet their features are very beautiful, BUT, they're still hidden under a hood, okay?! But yeah, they're beautiful. . Lets not give names, shall we?

But still, I remember when I first started playing with Karl Salameh, I remember chars like Galthran, (one of my favourite players, btw.) who played AWESOME, and evil at the same time.

So I really don't like the idea where evil is stereotyped as bad roleplay.

Did he say it was bad roleplay? No. He said that good chars who do nothing shouldn't be executed, but players of chars that go round killing random good people should expect to have to perma kill that char eventually.

Read the quote again, and analyze it, Alex.

In fact, the above was les meant as a real suggestion, but more a point to add to the discussion.
I think that the tax money which goes to the towns will help alot. But if we have players returning from the cross and doing such habits continuously, we can also ban those who do violate server rules.
But the points in the discussion are interesting, as is the fact that noone started flaming anyone yet.

So you don't think someone running in a tavern pking everyone disturbs roleplay?

People doing that can be reported and banned.

Damien wrote:as is the fact that noone started flaming anyone yet.

Patience, green hoppa'.

And, Alex, someone walking into the tavern and PKing everyone isn't called evil. He's called a bad roleplayer, blunt, dumb, brutish, and stupid. Evil is mischievous, it's sneaky, it's.. you know what I mean, don't you?

Don't you see the whole cool points thing as spam? I mean, on off topic okay, but in general it's unneeded.

Anyways I'm with Patric on this one.

It's not spam, it's a subtle way to express my gratitude upon one's finely formed, well thought-out comment. It's obvious you're just jealous you don't have any, Alex.

Anyways, to stay on-subject, I'm also with the idea of a possibility for officials to be able to execute characters.. but can't that be abused? Too-quick decisions, etc.. I think every execution should still be approved by a GM who has to do with the situation somehow.

If it serves no purpose and doesn't contribute to the topic at hand whatsoever, then it's spam.

I cannot express strongly enough how badly I feel about forced perma-killings. It just isn't right IMO. It's not just forced RP, it's UBER forced rp if the person doesn't want their char dead.

If you don't want your char perma killed, then don't play an evil character that takes over towns, kidnaps people or something like that.
I'm sure that normal thieves, bandits, etc.. won't be executed

my two cents:

if perma death as an ingame penalty should be introduced, it should not be entirely in the hands of players.

if entirely in player's hands it could be misused by judges, who are not able, to hold law and personal feelings apart.

the only way would be, that the court of a town hands a perma death sentence, accompanied by reasons for that decision.
and the staff/one of the staff checks, if the reasons are valid.
if they are valid, he can organize a public execution.
if not valid, he/they hands the courts sentence back.

Agreed Grandpa Korm.

Karl wrote:Read the quote again, and analyze it, Alex.

Perhaps you are confusing the word average, in this case meaning, normal, or commonplace, to your thinking of average, meaning decent, fair, maybe even acceptable.

Karl wrote:

Samantha Meryadeles wrote:So if a evil char commits again and again crimes, without stopping or learning from jailtimes and punishments, a perma death is more sensefull then for a good char doing nothing extra ordinairy that disturbs average roleplay.

I don't understand, Patric, why you consider evil chars are bad roleplay...

What he meant was

Day 1: Person goes into town, gets killed and banned.
Day 2: Person enters town again, gets chased out
Day 3: Person enters town, gets clouded by guard

ect.. ect... ect...

= bad roleplay

-----

I agree with Kormy

If you can't beat them, join them. Playing a bad guy is hard when he's overt about everything he does. The real well played bad guys are ones that accept society won't accept them for doing their deeds openly, so they do it in secret with no desire for recognition.

Has nobody learned anything from that Office Space song, "Damn it Feels Good to be a Gangsta?"

"Real gangsta a** n*ggas don't flex nuts, 'cause real gangsta a** n*ggas know they got 'em."

Hadrian_Abela wrote:

Karl wrote:

Samantha Meryadeles wrote:So if a evil char commits again and again crimes, without stopping or learning from jailtimes and punishments, a perma death is more sensefull then for a good char doing nothing extra ordinairy that disturbs average roleplay.

I don't understand, Patric, why you consider evil chars are bad roleplay...

What he meant was

Day 1: Person goes into town, gets killed and banned.
Day 2: Person enters town again, gets chased out
Day 3: Person enters town, gets clouded by guard

ect.. ect... ect...

= bad roleplay

-----

I agree with Kormy

Dain went into town often and only ever got clouded in town twice I believe. So for Dain it was....
Day 1: Guard tell him to leave and he does not..
Day 2: nothing
Day 3: nothing
Days 4,5,6,7,8,9,10: nothing
Day 11: Standing outside town and people is attacked by 4 or five people.

In my opinion... I saw some very bad role play while on Dain from good guys. They would attack Dain is groups of people but alone just walk by like he wasn't there(even if it was the day after they just attacked him).

I won't even mention the meta gaming(well, just there).
Damien's idea will never be implemented.