Topic to discuss the coded protections in the city-states.

[HavokBlue]

I don't think this changes anything for the Gemmed

[Norcal]

I don't think this changes anything for the Gemmed

It has done.

[Nyr]

As long as you let us know what you're experiencing via request and discuss it with us, I think we can work it out or provide more details as needed.

[Nyr]

As long as you let us know what you're experiencing via request and discuss it with us, I think we can work it out or provide more details as needed.

Scratch that.  It was a bug:

I ran into something that was a bug, at least so I was told.

and it was hotfixed yesterday.  So what happened was exactly what should have, I suppose:

we made a code change
we asked players to bring it up if they noticed something that seemed like a bug
you did so
we identified the incorrect behavior and fixed it
bug is gone

So no worries about punishment and stuff.  It was a bug! 

[Norcal]

Thanks. Dead bug.

[FreeRangeVestric]

Without being in a position to 'find out IC' anytime soon, this seems sort of like the crim-code for magick to me. In my opinion, the crim-code stifles interaction and roleplay more than it adds to the game.

But without being allowed to be told details, and not being allowed to talk about said details even if I knew them, I'm not sure what sort of discussion can be had. I hope the changes work out.

[Nyr]

Without being in a position to 'find out IC' anytime soon, this seems sort of like the crim-code for magick to me. In my opinion, the crim-code stifles interaction and roleplay more than it adds to the game.

Crim-code is a great analogy.

Let's hypothetically...take away crim-code and do nothing else...and extrapolate from there what the likeliest scenario might be if we were to do such a thing and maintain the kind of game we wish to maintain.

If we took away crim-code and did nothing else, the game (or at least the city-states, and without crim-code, it may as well be the whole game as city-states mean much less) would be run by those with coded power.  No, not actual social power, political power, or anything like that...pure coded power, because they can control life and death with few repercussions.  Would that hypothetical scenario have more interaction and roleplay? Maybe it would.  There definitely would be more interaction--people would constantly fear death at every turn in a city-state surrounded by soldiers that would not be able to do anything unless animated or controlled directly by a templar.  The people that were active and that could avoid templars would simply control the city as a PC.   Would there be more roleplay?  Not sure about that, with no backstop of minimal protection or expectation of retaliation, it's more probable that roleplay would just take a backseat to hiding or grabbing up a posse to go with you everywhere you needed to go.  Let's say for the sake of argument that there was more roleplay and that it wasn't stifled, it was boosted.  The roleplay wouldn't be following any particular rules or anything like that...it would ignore the documentation in many cases, and the guy or gal with the bigger posse would win.  OK, so staff would need to be doing a lot more in this scenario.  Rather than driving the more political or larger world plots, we'd be doing a lot more smaller plots, and that might be good.  What plots, though?  Smaller plots like "let's get a posse together and go destroy this guy hiding in the 'rinth."  Policing would have to be a lot more involved and we'd have to frequently revisit the "no harm" policy as we'd need to take a greater hand and more direct action on maintaining the balance of power.  We'd probably need to step in and ask those players that were going to be breaking the law to be sure and wish up so that staff could animate to them breaking the law and make the world react properly.  Even minor things like "hey, I'm going to go break into House Borsail with me and my rinky-dink thief" would require animation if we took that route.  (If we ignore it, we have a juggernaut House that can't stop a piddly thief.)  We'd have to draw the line somewhere, because we can't be around for every break-in, every murder, every theft.  Even when that line was drawn, it would still leave many that need reaction. Whenever challenges arose from PCs, we would be considering by hand in a more time-intensive process exactly what should happen in response for different scenarios.  We might even go so far as developing a matrix of responses so that staff animated responses to lawbreaking would be both consistent and realistic so that it wouldn't have to take up so much of our time deciding things case by case.

We could do that, true, and it would all have to be done in absence of a criminal code system, at least in this game.

Or...we could have an automated system that would respond when people broke the "law".  Planning it from scratch and putting in as a backstop, it would start out simple.  In some cases it might even seem a bit heavy-handed, but over time it would be revised to be more accurate.  Staff would review it, addressing concerns from players that want to work out their crime activity within the way the system should be, without putting an undue burden on staff or other players.  This would free up staff to liven up what said system/code provides rather than provide the entire response on their own.  This would free up players to play characters in cities that could expect to have at least a modicum of safety, and an expectation that they could progress their own plots that were slightly more advanced than "kill other dude before he kills me."  With crim-code, you can still project your own power, kill people, steal, etc, but you face the virtual power of the city-state you're in...because they outnumber and outmatch you.  In the short run, you may accomplish your goal and even escape.  In the long run, if you plan to duke it out, eventually, the crim code is going to get you and catch up with you.  There are even some things that your PC can't do that are related to crim-code.  Sure, you can try to break into House Borsail, but first you need to kill that guard.  And then evade the crim-code that results from killing that guard.  It seems nearly impossible, and logistically it may well be seemingly impossible.  And that's fine, because no one PC can stand up to the might of a city-state, and few to no PCs should be able to stand up even to the might of one noble House, because that House has backing from the crim-code as well, existing in the same city-state.



Picture all of that first big paragraph about the hypothetical world without crim-code.  Now replace everything about crime and coded power with magick and coded power.  The absence of a coded backstop for magick was actually a lot closer to what the game faced up until these changes were implemented.

That's what these changes aim to address, leveling the playing field between those with coded power and those that should by all rights have more power (or at least more of an expectation of protection)--in that locale.

[Reiloth]

Holy Wall of Text, batman!

But yes, having a 'crime-code' for Magick, especially in Tuluk, seems like a great idea, and as it should be.

The kind of havoc a Whiran, especially off-peak when Staff probably around to respond in kind, can wreck on the city is pretty silly. Lived through a few of those scenarios, and was equally pleased when Whirans were moved up the Karma scale.

The reaction of the city-state to this shouldn't differentiate between 'benign' and 'offensive' magick. Magick is magick. If you're casting, you should be persecuted (or enslaved).

[Zoan]

I'm divided on this.

On one hand, I like the power to be in the hands of the players (templars and their investigations, their use of spies, human resources and their mystical gifts).

On the other, any manifested Tuluki worth their salt would flee the state immediately, or turn themselves in out of a misguided attempt at mercy.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Nyr, that's a fine thought, and a great example, and I'm with you that far.

But we already have some complaints about the crim code and the way it handles everything in an all or nothing sort of way, with no grey areas or subdued responses to varying crimes. For instance, if I want to beat a person unconscious with my bare hands, I'll get the same response as I would get if I tried to stab them to death.

Now, I think there's a general consensus that that needs to, in time, evolve into a more faceted code of actions. I think the concern about the new magick-crim-code is the same. If a magick effect is detected or something else, for instance, in Allanak, will the Gemmer face the same response to be being surrounded by a horde of protective flies as they would for casting a fireball at a templar? If a Gemmer makes water in the street to give it to a beggar, is the level of response the same as if they tried to make the ground eat that beggar?

Reading over the entire thread, I think the only real concern for the code is having a mistake or some small action illicit the same response from the soldiers and templars as trying to cause mayhem.

[Nyr]

But we already have some complaints about the crim code and the way it handles everything in an all or nothing sort of way, with no grey areas or subdued responses to varying crimes. For instance, if I want to beat a person unconscious with my bare hands, I'll get the same response as I would get if I tried to stab them to death.

Do you have a better example?  Do you really think that crim code should distinguish between assault and assault with intent to kill?  Should it only take effect after someone is actually dead, and not interrupt fights that can easily end in death?  Should the code in that case try to be smarter than roleplay and the player, making assumptions that may well not be true?  Or is it actually not really that bad that the law will try to stop you from (god forbid) beating someone unconscious where they can see it?

Now, I think there's a general consensus that that needs to, in time, evolve into a more faceted code of actions. I think the concern about the new magick-crim-code is the same.

It already has.  If you want to knock someone out there are places and times that you can do that much more easily; if you want to brawl you can do that in a place that it works.  You can also hide from the law.  The law also won't shoot to kill unless you try to flee them or have nosave arrest toggled wrong.  Every one of those things (barring hiding) are improvements made over the years in order to make crim-code better.

If a magick effect is detected or something else, for instance, in Allanak, will the Gemmer face the same response to be being surrounded by a horde of protective flies as they would for casting a fireball at a templar?

What I specifically want to know (but may be unable to ask) is whether using magick in such a way that it won't provoke the crime code, still provoke these city defenses?

Depending on the situation, perhaps so.  I would say it would be safe to use common sense.

For example, a gemmed mage in Allanak practicing their magick inside the city (in properly approved areas/etc just as before this change as you would IC)...they'll be fine.

If a Gemmer makes water in the street to give it to a beggar, is the level of response the same as if they tried to make the ground eat that beggar?

See above, we covered this already.  As Adhira says we aren't going to go through every possible scenario.  If you're a gemmer things are going to work almost exactly as before, in Allanak, with a few exceptions that (at this time) we feel make sense.

[Nyr]

Do you have a better example?  Do you really think that crim code should distinguish between assault and assault with intent to kill?

After thinking about this for another hour or so, I came up with some scenarios in which it would be nice to have this distinction.  OK, so maybe I had a bad example of you having a bad example

edit to add:  still stuck on this, it does have some issues, one of which might be the kicker that would keep it from being changed, but it's a neat idea

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I'm sorry, man.. I just now saw this. I'll respond better tonight. I'm on my phone and at work right now.

[path]

ermagerd, never fear - Nyr is here! I love this idea. Oh how I love the idea of nonlethal magick having a chance at a time and a place, sort've, in Allanak.

[Nyr]

Just to clarify, I wasn't talking about magick, I was talking about crim-code there for the example 7DV provided.  It was a tangent.

[X-D]

Actually, in allanak at least, I can see this "Should it only take effect after someone is actually dead, and not interrupt fights that can easily end in death?" As fitting.

[i like me some ham]

If mundanes have visible magick on them, will the crimcode treat them exactly as if they were rogue? I imagine some gemmers would know this.

What brought this up was the fact that I did this one time about four years ago and nothing happened.

[Nyr]

If mundanes have visible magick on them, will the crimcode treat them exactly as if they were rogue? I imagine some gemmers would know this.

What brought this up was the fact that I did this one time about four years ago and nothing happened.

Find out IC.  Honestly most of your questions have been such that they could be answered by reading the announcement.

[Nyr]

We may want to put the crim-code discussion elsewhere.  Again, I apologize, it was a tangential remark I made, and while coming up with ideas to make it better = absolutely awesome, it also doesn't mean it is easy at all to implement.  The amount that Nyr likes something does not make it happen faster (or poop code would've existed in 2007) or at all (actual orbital space vestric platform code that randomly loads up said platform to kill PCs that meet x requirements [must be alone], only once every year or so RL, in such a ridiculous way that no one would ever believe it happened--but it also takes the body and we rez the PC automatically, back in the same spot, once they log back on, making players go crazy one at a time each year).

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Yeah, Nyr, I thought about making it a different topic and then didn't. My bad, too.

[Zoan]

We may want to put the crim-code discussion elsewhere.  Again, I apologize, it was a tangential remark I made, and while coming up with ideas to make it better = absolutely awesome, it also doesn't mean it is easy at all to implement.  The amount that Nyr likes something does not make it happen faster (or poop code would've existed in 2007) or at all (actual orbital space vestric platform code that randomly loads up said platform to kill PCs that meet x requirements [must be alone], only once every year or so RL, in such a ridiculous way that no one would ever believe it happened--but it also takes the body and we rez the PC automatically, back in the same spot, once they log back on, making players go crazy one at a time each year).

The space vestric space station thing happened to my character Zoan once, swear on Christ. I found a Drovian sword and had to hard-quit due to no quit room. I logged in the next day in the Gaj, wielding the blade, only now it was bloodied.

[Incognito]

Having different automated defense mechanisms for Allanak and Tuluk (against magickers) - is one thing.

I've noticed that there are some changes to the way spells work (or don't work). I've put in a query via the request tool - just in case it's a bug.

However, if some spells are gonna work differently within the confines of the Cities, or if they're not gonna work totally - can we please get a head's up? I know we _can_ "find out ICLY" - but that'd mean trying out all spells within the Cities, and hope the "conditions" for all the spells are properly met - to do a full and proper trial.

I'd really appreciate if Staff could compile a short note highlighting changes in the way spells work/dont work - within the Cities, so those players who're playing magickers don't end up getting unpleasant surprises in an emergency. Players who're currently playing magickers could put in a request via the tool - and ask staff for the note.

Again - I'm not asking for what sort of defenses have been introduced - those we can find out ICLY - at our own risk and peril. I'm just asking for changes in the way spells which used to work in the Cities (before the changes) - so we know what to expect.

From an IC viewpoint - these changes have probably been in existence since a long time in either of the Cities - and so - magickers living in them - would probably be aware of how spells work differently outside the City walls and within the Cities.

--EDITED TO ADD--
On a side note - would it be fair to ask Staff to spell out what is the exact boundary for the "physical" City States of Allanak and Tuluk - i.e. which areas are included and which arent - in the purview of these changes? Is this change going to affect just the area within the main gates on either side of each city? Will some outlying "areas" under the command of each of the City's also be included? Will some of the seedier areas be excluded?

[Nyr]

Your head's-up was the post saying things changed, we did ask for players to submit any requests if they noticed bugs (or what they thought were bugs).  The ones reported so far have been fixed.  In your specific case, this is working as intended, though maybe the message to PC could be more specific.  I'll respond to your request to give you a bit more detail.

Highlighting the way spells work/don't work:  we did that here, in this thread, but only with broad strokes.  In general, if you're gemmed, everything works the way it did before.  The changes across the board are along (what we on staff feel are) common sense lines.  If you are a magicker, gemmed or not, and casting a spell, ask yourself: What is it that this spell is intended to do?  Where is it that I am casting it?  If you disagree with how it is working then you disagree with how staff has implemented it...which is fine, as there are bound to be some disagreements with any code implementation!  All we can do at this point is let you know if it is working as intended, and in this case, it is.

What is the physical boundary?  Find out IC.  Or not, and just use common sense, and report if you think you see a bug, like you have done! 

[Jingo]

Just gonna point out the the level of specificity made in this thread and announcement is misleading. The rules were changed drastically to make some concepts completely unplayable.

[Nyr]

Just gonna point out the the level of specificity made in this thread and announcement is misleading. The rules were changed drastically to make some concepts completely unplayable.

I've made some changes to the "help magick" helpfile as a result of some things that staff have posted in this thread, making them more clear.

http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Magick