Return Armageddon to its roots: Double all Movement Costs

[Thunkkin]

I'd love to see bands of NPC raiders and highwaymen along the road.

Especially if they could be loaded with some scripts to subdue/attack with mercy on and steal stuff, instead of just instaganking.

Hell yes.

That would be AWESOME.  Then you'd not only have a chance at survival, but could create a mini-RPT by calling up the cavalry and hunting down the gith that stole your favorite lucky rock.

[Qzzrbl]

I'd love to see bands of NPC raiders and highwaymen along the road.

Especially if they could be loaded with some scripts to subdue/attack with mercy on and steal stuff, instead of just instaganking.

Hell yes.

Let's not forget sap.

[Clearsighted]

I like alot of what I've heard.

I just want to reiterate:

This Is Not A Mount Problem.

Mounts are perfect right now, in relation to their stamina and how much better they are to use than if you were walking the same distance. It's not the amount of mount stamina that matters. If they were made lower, it would be easier for some rangers just to go on foot.

It is an overall issue of travel. It affects being mounted just as much as being on foot and definitely affects Desert Elves too.

So any kind of solution will need to take into account all modes of travel. (And there's been some great ideas offered). But not something so simple as lowering mount's stamina.

[Morrolan]

This is not a mount problem, this is a geography problem.

I suggest that we allow some of the roads to be worn away by the weather unless maintained, or at least increase the stamina drain on the roads.

In other words, only increase the stamina drain on the roads.  Make the advantage of roads be that they are well traveled and therefore sometimes free of dangers...and sometimes attract more dangers.  But more then halving the stamina cost?  Too much of an advantage unless the staff want/need people to travel to consolidate the player base for playability reasons.

Morrolan

[KIA]

I suggest that we allow some of the roads to be worn away by the weather unless maintained, or at least increase the stamina drain on the roads.

This has happened to various parts of the roads in the past, but with Tuluk and Allanak currently engaged in a truce, it seems right that the roads are maintained right now.

KIA

[musashi]

I suggest that we allow some of the roads to be worn away by the weather unless maintained, or at least increase the stamina drain on the roads.

This has happened to various parts of the roads in the past, but with Tuluk and Allanak currently engaged in a truce, it seems right that the roads are maintained right now.

KIA

But to me, it seems wrong that you never see NPC 'Nak or Tuluk military/slaves out there maintaining the roads. All in all I think that the speed at which you can make your way from Allanak, to Luirs, to Tuluk is fine. Rather, it seems like the lack of danger when on the road is the problem.

I like a lot of the ideas I heard about raiders and what have you prowling the roads, esp the one about scripting them to just beat you up and loot you ... and I could even get behind the idea of lowering the stamina drain discount the road provides (though I still think it should remain even if it's just a point or two).

But I still hold firm to the idea that doubling the cost of movement is not the right way to go about making the wilds seem more dangerous.

[Ampere]

This, imho, seems fairly straight forward.  The known world has two major centers of civilization, several merchantile empires with an interest in unimpeded trade, and Luir's in the middle. Just saying.

Movement penalty is a totally decent idea.

[Yokunama]

I think it would be more productive to add more environment to the game, than to add double movement points.  That's my stance on it.

I walked around outside Tuluk for a day and saw TWO critters. Neither were bad or difficult. WTF happened? Are people over hunting again?

*points towards the lump under the rug.*

[Yokunama]

I think another pc raiding group would solve this with npc support.  Like the blackmoon

Agreed. There was a raiding group at one part in time that made it hard for travel along the road. We don't need the increased stamina penalties to for threats to engage us along the North Road, and if you mercenaries, guards, or whatever the fuck they call themselves these days, want something to do, make it worth someone's wild to invite you to come along on the trip.

It seems to me that people are asking for more threats, but no one is willing to contribute to the cause. A coded penalty isn't the way to go here people.

[Riev]

A PC raiding group would be nice, so long as nobody goes and whines to the templars about how some desert elf stole their shit when they were on the road, and the templars go out and declare all out war.

What happens on North Road, stays on North Road. Unless you're the Byn, but seriously, who hires those pansies anyways?

[Yam]

Return Armageddon to its roots: PK more.

[FantasyWriter]

Return Armageddon to its roots: PK more.

+2 points for Yam.

[Clearsighted]

Return Armageddon to its roots: PK more.

This is ultimately flawed because there are a great many people whom are almost entirely immune from any but the most incredibly skilled, equipped and lead of PC raiders or bandits. And many of these are mundane. So it does nothing really in the long run.

There's nothing inherently wrong with making people actually need to stop at least once when trekking from Nak to Tuluk and back. Otherwise, Luirs wouldn't exist.

[Yokunama]

Return Armageddon to its roots: PK more.

This is ultimately flawed because there are a great many people whom are almost entirely immune from any but the most incredibly skilled, equipped and lead of PC raiders or bandits. And many of these are mundane. So it does nothing really in the long run.

There's nothing inherently wrong with making people actually need to stop at least once when trekking from Nak to Tuluk and back. Otherwise, Luirs wouldn't exist.

If you beat them to death along the roadside, they will stop and rest.

No one is immune to death in this game.... Maybe Tek, Muk Utep, and those other guys.

[Kryos]

The problem with approaching the perceived problem, as it has been developed in this thread, is that it will lead to escalation of the incriminated behavior.  It will *not* achieved the desired goal.  As long as their are finite spawn points and solvable algorythms for npc behavior, people will eventually gather sufficient data points to render any non-human controlled response moot.  There is definitely learning software(its even freeware!) available that could rebuff my statement, but, I doubt the staff wants to take the time to plug in AI development models into npc control.  Though that could make a wicked-bad project/thesis.  Not to sound condescending, but this, again, seems spawned of complacency that comes with familiarity. 

If you've played 15 years and know every god-damn thing about the game, you'll only be satisfied with new content.  This happens for staff too(which I've been, but not here).  You learn all the precious "secrets" and sudden its dull from a "exploration" perspective.  Of course, making compelling stories with excellent players is *never* dull.  Arm has plenty of potential there, but you just need to be ambitious/motivated enough to do it.

[number13]

When Luirs was infested with Mantis, crossing from one city state to the other seemed a lot more dangerous.

But, I'd prefer that danger come from PC Raiders rather than NPC hordes. The PC militia, house military wings, and Byn units would have an interesting enemy to fight -- instant plots without much ongoing staff involvement. Monster hordes need a staff member to create interesting scenarios.  Otherwise, the horde is just a big, dumb collection of NPCs for savvy players to avoid or exploit.

If the danger comes from PCs, then the danger of the roads would scale with the playerbase's size. An offpeak player could usually get away with crossing the desert without having to hire the Byn.

The problem is PCs who live dangerously (for example, raiding) die earlier than the domesticated tavern-sitter. Which leads, strangely, to the potential marks often being scarier in combat than the typical raider.  Yes, it's possible to have a scary raider PC under the current rules, but it's a rare achievement.  Successful raider PCs should be more somewhat common.

To flatten the power curve, raiders need some coded help. Infest Luirs or set up south and north camp with race X, open race X to play at d-elf karma.  The disadvantage of race X would be they are considered KOS by all civilized persons (most notably guards at all settlements), and don't speak the common language. The advantage of the raider race would be pretty good combat skills (say, 5 to 10 days worth of Byn sparring) right out the gate.

[musashi]

My gut feeling is to dislike the suggestion number13, sorry.
I just don't think I'd feel comfortable with starting out a race of people 5-10 days ahead of the average PC, solely for the purpose of looking around for other PC's to fight with.

I'm all for PC's doing some raiding, but I would rather see these raiding groups as PC created clans, or perhaps tribes that have a penchant for raiding ... rather than some sub-race of humans, the way we have city and desert elves. Human, and raider human seems a bit weird to me.

Also, I would like for any PC doing the raiding to have put in their training time just the same as the player that they're trying to raid. I've had my characters robbed quite a bit out in the wilds ... sometimes the raider is stronger than my PC and I end up begging for my life and get left with nothing but a loincloth ... sometimes my PC sends the raider running and has a chuckle about it ... sometimes it never comes to combat because the raider just wants a headwrap or the hide I just skinned, and it's less of a bother to just give it to them and send them on their way.

I don't want all of those possible situations to suddenly default to: The raider beats you up and leaves you with nothing but your loincloth.

[number13]

I just don't think I'd feel comfortable with starting out a race of people 5-10 days ahead of the average PC, solely for the purpose of looking around for other PC's to fight with.

My (sketchy) math says you aren't going to see too many raiders, and the majority that are seen will be weaker than their targets.

Think of it this way --
If a raider faces an average of 4 life or death situations over the course of 1 day of playing, and a mark faces between 0 and 1 life or death situation over the course of 1 day playing then the average marks will be more powerful than the average raider, and therefore difficult to impossible to successfully defeat.

Both characters advance their skills and combat potency at the same rate. In fact, the mark might actually increase his combat potency faster due to greater availably of other players to spar with, not to mention relatively safe practice hunting NPCs.  Meanwhile, one flunked life or death savings throw, and characters start over at zero earned combat potency.  If a player is dedicated to the idea of playing a raider, then he'll find himself at zero earned combat potency far far more often than a player dedicated to the idea of playing a tavern sitter.

This doesn't factor in the infamy a raider will attain, leading the eventuality of his death as other players (backed by the resources of city-states) become intent on PKing the raider.

The end result is what we see now -- there is no gamist incentive* for playing a raider as a primary occupation, so we see few serious raiders. North Road is almost as safe as the Templar's Row.

Adding hostile NPCs is a bandaid creates other problems -- offpeak players are penalized; OOC knowledge of NPC spawning positions/coded behaviors is rewarded; sophisticated interactions are difficult/impossible (for example, can't bribe an NPC to leave you alone).

Using empowered PCs as raiders carries the risk of PCs abusing their coded power. Truth, but it's the same for just about every class/race with karma. For example, half-giants begin the game able to defeat just about any other player, with only roleplaying concerns and the city-state's coded law enforcement to keep them in check.

....

*[It may be advantageous to act on the occasional opportunity (for example, mugging a wounded hunter rather than helping or ignoring him), but there is little advantage to turning it into a lifestyle.]

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I don't mind PC raiders. Indeed, they do add a facet to the game.

But I still want to see a modern, situation-appropriate return of the gith hordes. Gith were an instant reason to head out and do military stuff. They didn't require staff intervention to be fun to do. If you're worried about penalizing off-peak players, then ask staff to make an algorithm to account for off-peak play. Certain NPCs could peter off (read: be purged) or ramp up (read: be loaded) based on how many PCs were online.

Villainous NPCs are a reliable source of military IC fun and danger. Bring them back.

[AmandaGreathouse]

Using empowered PCs as raiders carries the risk of PCs abusing their coded power. Truth, but it's the same for just about every class/race with karma. For example, half-giants begin the game able to defeat just about any other player, with only roleplaying concerns and the city-state's coded law enforcement to keep them in check.

Suggestion: Leave raiders to regular PC's, make your raiders have the (perfectly logical, perfectly IC) goal of swaying a half-giant into joining up with their little venture.

[musashi]

I believe, number13, that your math may be flawed, because it doesn't seem that you are accounting for the fact that raider PC's may very well be doing other things besides just looking for people to raid, and rightly so I think.

A PC who wants to raid other PC's but is new does not, and probably should not, go out and start attacking heavily armed individuals on the road the same way that a hunter PC who's new should not go looking for a carru as his first catch.

I just feel that everyone, reguardless of what job they want to persue in game should put their "grind time" in the same as everyone else. The example you gave of half-giants coming into the game able to kill just about anyone else seems a little off to me as well. I admit I haven't ever played a half-giant or been fighting one so I don't have a comparison but ... I'm better sorcerers and mindbenders don't enter the game able to insta-kill other PC's. My suspicions tell me they enter the game perhaps more helpless than a warrior or ranger would, and probably have to survive their way up into power (again, I'm just guessing, I admit it) ... and they're the highest karma classes available.

I just think everyone should start at the newbie level for their skills and work themselves up unless it's some kind of special application. Raiders who want to be successful raiders should probably start small, the same way characters who want to be silt horror hunters should likewise, probably set their newbie priorities a little lower and aim for that as an end goal.

[Delstro]

It is definitely more likely that a hunter will die more often than a house PC, however, ALL NON-combat experienced, all sole hunters, all ex-tor house guards, all bards, etc, and etc... You should be fearful of someone riding up on you in full combat gear telling you to "Drop that or die".  Why would you just attack the raider nonchalantly, and then if you start to lose, you give in, or if he starts to lose, you keep going all out? THOSE are REAL weapons. They are really cutting you and hitting you. Why are you carelessly risking your PCs life, just to see if the raider is more experienced than your PC? That sounds unrealistic to me. That is in my own honest opinion.
If some serious looking raider got close enough to me to start demanding that I do something, then I will drop my pack and ride off into the distance happy I didn't die.  He -could- have people hiding out waiting for you to make your move, but you know that raiders are usually alone in the game, so you are just going to attack him?
Fear the unknown. It is the only thing keeping you alive.
On the other hand, if some asshat rode up on you wearing silk, linen, and a big branch, and they told me to drop everything but my loincloth, I'd tell them to fuck off. The key to raiding is go BIG or be mildly annoying. Don't take everything, snatch and run. That is all. Good day.

[fourTwenty]

 

Umm, knock-knock, certain favorite D-elf tribe I'm looking at you. There are PC groups that -should- be raiding, they would rather run around and explore the Known though. Just sayin'

[Clearsighted]

I don't think the issue will be fixed or helped by PC raiding. In fact, I think PC raiding only exacerbates the current flaws.

Everyone knows the reason why dedicated PC raiders often tend to be far less adept than dedicated tavern sitters. No need to repeat the whys or wherefores. We all deep down know what actually goes on. There is furthermore already a low karma, dedicated raider clan that everyone hates. There are even successful raiders who have courageously taken it upon themselves to give others a harder time. Of course, they are also (for the most part) all magickers who needed to spend only 2-3 days sitting in a cave somewhere, instead of 20-30 honing mundane skills. (Not to say that it doesn't take much more for a magicker to truly master their craft, but they can become relatively powerful at dealing with mundane threats, especially mundane PCs in a short amount of time).

And the last thing we want to do is encourage more magickers than their already is. Right? Right??

So I still think, in the long run, that simply doubling everyone's movement costs is the most elegant and practical solution. And that goes for both mounts, delves and whatever it takes to do other movey stuff.

EDIT: And not to get too IC, but my current PC has dealt with /alot/ of dedicated raiders, and I still feel this way. Probably had more recent raider interaction than the vast majority of the playerbase at this stage.