Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 6.2K All Categories
- 3.1K Everything Achaea
- 1.5K North of Thera
- 26 Archives of the Terraformer
- 257 The Matsuhama Arena
- 885 The Golden Dais of Creation
- 299 The Scarlattan Theatre
- 149 The Blank Canvas
- 2K Getting Help
- 412 General Questions
- 258 Quick Class Questions
- 1.3K Tech Support
- 313 Client Help
- 486 Curing Systems and Scripts
- 841 Off-Topic
- 255 The Wander Inn
- 586 The Universal Membrane
- 298 Class Discussions
- 298 Individual Class Sections
- 20 Alchemist
- 9 Apostate
- 30 Blademaster
- 9 Depthswalker
- 14 Druid
- 4 Infernal
- 20 Jester
- 19 Magi
- 34 Monk
- 11 Occultist
- 8 Paladin
- 7 Priest
- 29 Runewarden
- 18 Sentinel
- 26 Serpent
- 20 Shaman
- 9 Sylvan
Comments
to the risk of losing something that may be worth hundreds of thousands of gold (and thus take literal RL days to bash up, thanks goldcap).
next please.
Thank you for helping to reiterate my point that if people will afk on a ship/log out for several days to avoid losing 30 min of exp, it should not be a problem to do the same for a day to remove an instance of casing.
As it is, casings already telegraph a pickpocket attempt (it has already been mentioned that it takes several casings to get back to previous success % of targetted pickpocket) and give ample time to bolster your defenses and/or secure your items.
Not only that, there are several additional layers of protection for gold that already exist. If you're referring to items that shouldn't be able to be pickpocketed such as legend deck cards, that is a whole different problem and has nothing to do with casing mechanics.
The only change for casing I think should be added is a notification for the target when casings expire, if it doesn't already exist.
The only thing that makes casing "okay" is the new housing stuff.
Some of us have more in our pack than some characters are worth, and it is honestly ridiculous that there's a chance of me losing it all for any reason. Especially when that reason is still going to be "I DC'd and lost internet and couldn't log out".
- "Class fantasy" theft
- $$$ Theft
- "I want that specific item" theft
- Role play theft
The main problems being the inability to opt-in.
I see some potential solutions, at least for Serpent-based theft:
Class fantasy: I'm defining this as the thief wants the experience of casing someone, stalking them, getting past their defences and succeeding. I think the gameplay sounds pretty good for this except for the victim. Chits are interesting. For something like this, to make it less painful to the victim one option could be to have the thief steal some generic, sellable item that isn't actually taken from the player's inventory. Value of generic sellable item could increase with number of cases. So they might get "worthless junk" or "sparkly junk".
Making money: Main problem here is that victims don't like losing all their gold, amounts of which can vary. Yeah, you can bank it, but the loss is still potentially high and painful. Potential solution is gold loss cap or make it a percent rather than all of it. Then it just hurts like death. Could be combined with "generic item", so when they get "generic item" victim loses relatively small percent of gold.
Specific item: Can be fun for the thief but really sucks for the victim. I think it should be like combat where something causes them to opt-in, like infamy. Combat has to have a basis, because griefing sucks. This is pretty similar.
Role play theft: I think this is the best kind of theft, though I imagine it's a bit rare, and there should be a way to get around the fencing system for this. Like combat I think the RP should be established in some way. Perhaps when indemnified?
What stage of capitalism is this again
Shirszae can confirm.
And you won't understand the cause of your grief...
...But you'll always follow the voices beneath.
What makes the mechanism completely unfair (regardless of the RL time required to do casing/fencing) is:
1.) It opens the door for one player to endlessly grief another.
2.) There is no mechanism, through which the victim could even hope to do as much damage to the offender, as can be done to the victim.
- Thief steals an item worth a week worth of RL time bashing for gold.
- Victim has no readily available cash to counter the thief's bid during the fencing phase.
- Thief walks away with highly valuable item while the worst that could happen to him/her, is to suffer one and exactly one death. Amounting to the player losing perhaps as much as 30 minutes of intense bashing, to regain lost XP.
Until there exists a mechanism through which the victim can damage the thief equally, the mechanic as it exists now, can not be fixed.
In the case of Achaea that means:
2.) Make theft of anything but gold and a few other basic items, impossible.
Other than that, the best anti-theft mechanism in game, is to simply have nothing worth stealing. There are few things as much fun as hearing a thief complain about the empty pack they just got from you.
Oh wait this is Achaea and we have to use Old English. So I think you just put the H in the wrong spot. Should be hhhhwinners. I learned proper Old English from Stewie
oh, wait
Edit: To clarify too: I want to make it clear that I do NOT condone adding things that divide the haves and haves-not further, and even as someone with a trove of arties I've made it clear I don't mind if I get nerfed if it brings balance more in line and the haves and haves-not closer, but opt-in to theft does not do that, this is something that you can do with just selfishness, rewearing triggers and keeping an eye on your stuff and where you put it. I feel I am 99% safe outside of my internet doing shenanigans or something I am missing, but at worst I lose a few sigils that are close to decaying, or one of my many empty packs.
It doesn't matter that this new thing brings down theft victims from 100 to 10; it should never be possible that someone can get away with stealing value from another without any real consequences.
I'll waiting for the typical "but you can hire" joke of an excuse just because it's Wednesday and the midweek is always slow. I need a good laugh.
I don't think being able to steal a few million gold off someone from a lucky pickpocket is healthy, but theft is still an interesting mechanic that is unique to only a few games, because so many make sure theft can not exist at all. I may, or may not, swing my opinion towards having easy to get 100% safety measures against theft as long as you pay attention and keepup, but complete removal of the system does just that: Complete removal.
Edit: This may get missed, but I am all for there being more ways to reclaim your lost goods from a thief, or better forms of retaliation. I just think that is a much better path than theft removal.
Why do we have such strict rules about PK when ultimately you stand to lose far less? You die, you go through a short death sequence, and you return with a slight loss of XP. It's understandably frustrating when that happens when you aren't expecting it, and so we have contracts and even issues to resolve 'unjustified' attacks. How does theft benefit the game by presenting a 'sense of danger', but being killed is off-limits?
If either of these systems stands to be opt-in, it should be the one that is almost entirely one-sided and costlier, not the one where the game provides a means to defend against (autocuring). So why don't we have an 'auto anti-theft' system? Why not have a CONFIG ANTITHEFT ON that will re-wear any worn items without requiring triggers?
I also don't feel like theft is handled correctly by placing it under the scope of infamy. It's inconsistent that you're required to be infamous or otherwise open PK in order to attack others who are in that state, but thieves are essentially protected from their would-be victims until they make the first move. Thieves should either be restricted to being able to steal from others who are infamous, or thieves should be open game to anyone at any time - outside of the scope of the infamy system. If everyone is automatically opting in to being a potential theft target, then thieves should be opting into being a potential target to anyone in that same pool.
And what does it even matter? The people that "play" thieves don't care one bit about a tiny bit of experience. They care about personal fun and satisfaction.
Stealing will never be fun for anyone but the thief. I'm glad we cater to those who attempt to ruin the enjoyment of the game on a daily basis, that is very smart.
I remember a rule like this existing a long time ago, but I can't find anything in the help files beyond the fact that theft grants a lot of infamy, and therefore my assumption is that it falls under the same rules and restrictions as anything else regarding infamy (which like I said doesn't fit theft at all in my mind).
Results of disembowel testing | Knight limb counter | GMCP AB files
He is a known thief.
Since it would last until the infamy dissipates, it would functionally make someone open PK for as long as they're still infamous as a thief. Once the infamy flag drops off, the thief flag would as well, and would not return until someone attempted theft again.
Some clarification on the rules and changed to open thieves up to some actual pain would be neat.