Banking deed

[RogueGunslinger]

I'm fucking horrible at saving money. So now I just hardly ever spend it, but when I do I pretty much spend it all.

[hyzhenhok]

Of course if you're conscientious and frugal you're most likely to be wealthy.

Doesn't fit the setting for it to be that easy.

I'd much prefer if the difficulty curve were shifted so that we could see some actual economic desperation and barely making ends meet.

[CodeMaster]

Of course if you're conscientious and frugal you're most likely to be wealthy.

Doesn't fit the setting for it to be that easy.

I'd much prefer if the difficulty curve were shifted so that we could see some actual economic desperation and barely making ends meet.

I hear you, but at the end of the day you probably have to impose constraints on yourself to see this happen.

Dump I

I had a hell of a time making any money when I was playing a non-crafter in the Byn.  The T'zai Byn "Runner" role puts some huge constraints on what you can do to generate wealth.  5 sid was a big deal to me back then -- and I look back on it fondly.  When they kicked me out I was flirting with hunger for a while (until I figured out where to buy cheap food).

Other times you can run into a newbie PC's dead body and can't help but make 1k off of it -- and all of a sudden your desperate 'rinther is no longer poor.  It's up to you to stop this from happening: play a superstitious character who doesn't like looting the dead, or a paranoid character who's worried about the repercussions of being caught, or a spice addict whose expensive habit keeps her down.


Dump II

Armageddon isn't really built around the idea of grinding for material wealth (I realize I'm preaching to the choir -- this thread is filled with some of my favorite players).  You can do it, and that's what the early game tends to be modelled around, but it's not designed to be the complete rat-pellet experience that World of Warcraft is, for example.

To me, Arm is more centered around the idea of building shared stories with an element of unpredictability (personified in this case by the horrible diceroll).  If banking deeds and other more liquid forms of wealth assist in this basic idea, then I'm all it.  If making it harder to grind wealth makes more people want to interact with each other and tell stories, I'm all for that too.

[Chettaman]

Of course if you're conscientious and frugal you're most likely to be wealthy.

Doesn't fit the setting for it to be that easy.

I'd much prefer if the difficulty curve were shifted so that we could see some actual economic desperation and barely making ends meet.

characters who can should go and have a drink everyday. Characters who can should get free food cooked by an expert in their craft, hired by the house that can afford that. Characters who can should pay for expensive prostitutes at every turn.
- if you had to eat everyday. If you were alcohol took a night to pass through you. If mudsex lasted five in game minutes. xD
then you'd have to pay like:
40(vennant steaks) x 11(days of the week) = 440 coins a week
+ 11(whisky shots) x 11 = 121 (and who's gonna go and get one drink?)
+ 50 per prostitute x 11 = 550
== 1111 + misc expenses an rl day ... and then sooner or later rent. And sleep. They probably have to sleep. They can't work non stop like us heroes. - so people go without eating everyday and people - well no. They're gonna drink to ease their sorrows and they'll do the sex like nine times instead to save cash. These people suffer, man!
Even if they got a bag of salt everyday they'd make a 100 or a little less. 1100, man. That is almost exactly how much they need to live comfortably, man!

and then there's the argument that time is different from them to us as well as how much sleep they need and I might just be twisting words to make sense, but really. Living comfortably isn't as cheap for some people.

and I don't know about you, but that's a lot if you ask me. I agree - making coins and survival is pretty easy for us. I always imagine we're "heroes" compared to the rest of the plebeians, though. Pip-pip!

[hyzhenhok]

No. In a desperate, resource-starved primitive society, people should not have to live like modern, immature and irresponsible university students who eat out and go drinking every night to run out of money. And reading the documentation, I'm not seeing anywhere that says "your PC is automatically a heroic exception to the norm in this desperate, brutal world."

I hear you, but at the end of the day you probably have to impose constraints on yourself to see this happen.

As things work now, yes. But the entire point of this line of conversation is the way things work now isn't ideal, and I am talking about how changing the banking system might move it to the better.

[Desertman]

No. In a desperate, resource-starved primitive society, people should not have to live like modern, immature and irresponsible university students who eat out and go drinking every night to run out of money. And reading the documentation, I'm not seeing anywhere that says "your PC is automatically a heroic exception to the norm in this desperate, brutal world."

I hear you, but at the end of the day you probably have to impose constraints on yourself to see this happen.

As things work now, yes. But the entire point of this line of conversation is the way things work now isn't ideal, and I am talking about how changing the banking system might move it to the better.

The PC's in Armageddon are naturally predisposed towards qualities that make them inherently the exception to the rule.

Much like the player characters in just about every other game in existence, the characters played by the players are ALMOST always given to having an unnaturally ability to excel above the standard masses.

Why?

Because that's how video games work.

Armageddon isn't at this time any different and never has been.

The documentation might not have a sentence in it that says, "Armageddon works like a standard video game and has standard video game elements.".

The reason for that? It is understood by most people who play video games.

Now, if your argument is, "I want to see this aspect of this particular video game changed.". Then fine.

But, pretending things aren't how they are and have always been isn't the right step in that direction.

Yes, PC's are naturally predisposed to excelling above the squabbling rabble that is the VNPC population of the world. That is understood.

Should that be changed?

That is the question.

I like playing heroes and the vast majority of my characters actually are "better" than your standard VNPC especially towards the middle/end of their careers. For me, I would have to say no to "nerfing PC traits" to make them more like playing a VNPC, which in my opinion is what it would amount to. I don't want to play a VNPC.

[Delirium]

Playing a VNPC would be godawful boring. I don't want to have to spend every game session desperately scraping for survival to the point that I don't have time to interact, build stories, and play out scenes because my hunger bar is ticking down.

[Desertman]

Playing a VNPC would be godawful boring. I don't want to have to spend every game session desperately scraping for survival to the point that I don't have time to interact, build stories, and play out scenes because my hunger bar is ticking down.

This.

At one point I got slotted into a position and basically forced into playing what I would consider to be an NPC. A lively NPC to be sure, but I still felt like I was just being used as an NPC to fulfill someone else's predetermined plotline and/or wishes for how they thought things should go.

I quit almost immediately when I realized, "I'm not even running the show anymore. I'm just their hiring NPC.".

Nope. Been there. Definitely not in the boat of, "go back there again".

[hyzhenhok]

Strawmen. I have no idea how you get from "I should not automatically become wealthy just because my PC survives a few months" to "I don't want to have to spend every game session desperately scraping for survival to the point that I don't have time to interact, build stories, and play out scenes because my hunger bar is ticking down."

If you make the choice your character should have their ducks in order, that they should be wealthy, I'm all for the tools being in the game that make that possible without necessarily there being a huge time sink. But that is a choice you make for your character, rather than it being the default as it is.

[Delirium]

It's only the default if you know how to do it - you can choose not to, or choose to let your character be unwise with their money.

I remember having a very tough time as a newbie (admittedly, many years ago) making money and not starving to death.

You have to remember that sometimes things that appear easy only appear so because you have your veteran glasses on.

[hyzhenhok]

What I'm talking about has no bearing on an PC's ability to survive basically. I'll believe new players are struggling to survive when I don't see every stable maxxed out with dung all the time, but ultimately that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the step beyond survival, where the character's extra coins are being deposited into the bank and gradually, inexorably, increasing.

"You can choose not to" sounds simple, but it isn't. We are talking about the very core of the game here: the power to define who your character is and play a role.

Yes, I can choose to never use the bank. I can choose to never pick up valuable salvage or resources. I can choose to never loot coins of corpses. I can choose to throw character's money away. I can choose to do all sorts of things if I want my character to be poor. But when I have to act against my character, or literally design my character's personality so they will be inclined to make such decisions, my ability to play and roleplay are seriously constrained. What if I don't want to play a character who is paranoid about Nenyuk? Who is superstitious about carrying large number of coins? I should not have to resort to such extremes.

Chettaman's claim that people who are modest and frugal will inevitably be rich isn't even true in the cushy modern world. I see no reason why it should be true in Armageddon, and I'm pretty sure it can be changed without apocalyptic consequences for basic survival or characters actually trying to accumulate wealth.

[BadSkeelz]

One of the best ways to keep your PC from getting wealthy is to spend your coin as quickly as possible. Luxury purchases - food, drink, whores, jewelry, etc. - are a great way to do this. Even better when a PC can supply them, as it's instant interaction.

The default of Zalanthas is hardscrabble poverty. Most of our PCs will have that as a background. Once they stop being VNPCs and become PCs, the money tends to come in. And what do people do when suddenly flush with cash? They splurge. It's not "living like an immature college student," it's the feast part of "Feast or famine."

It also helps to set limits on your playstyle. Try only crafting one item to sell per RL day, or only getting paid by PCs and clan salaries. Or have a cap on how much money you ever possess at one time. It's possible to play a character that's comfortable, with time to interact, not terribly likely to starve to death, and who still thinks selling something for fifty coins is a big fucking deal worth celebrating.

[BadSkeelz]

Yes, I can choose to never use the bank. I can choose to never pick up valuable salvage or resources. I can choose to never loot coins of corpses. I can choose to throw character's money away. I can choose to do all sorts of things if I want my character to be poor. But when I have to act against my character, or literally design my character's personality so they will be inclined to make such decisions, my ability to play and roleplay are seriously constrained. What if I don't want to play a character who is paranoid about Nenyuk? Who is superstitious about carrying large number of coins? I should not have to resort to such extremes.

Even if you don't want to play a character who does any of these things there is one character we almost all play: the kind who can die at any given time. You can't take your 'sid with you, it doesn't accrue interest in the bank. Beyond a given nest egg, what does amassing it really benefit you?

[hyzhenhok]

Yes, I could restrict my characters who are not supposed to be rich or become rich to fatalist, hedonist, spendthrift superstitious and paranoid bumpkins who know nothing about the world, its economy or the value of things. Strangely, I do not find these appealing suggestions nor do I appreciate the insinuations that accompany them.

Or we could do something really easy like let set a minimum bank account balance of 3000 coins. (Bonus points if you make a templar and Guild-accessible list of such accounts accessed in the last month.) Or one of another dozen ideas I have that would have a similar effect. It would be so easy to change the basic incentives that lead to the problems I'm talking about, without affecting low-level survival or high-level wealth accumulation. I really do not understand the resistance here.

[CodeMaster]

Yes, I could restrict my characters who are not supposed to be rich or become rich to fatalist, hedonist, spendthrift superstitious and paranoid bumpkins who know nothing about the world, its economy or the value of things. Strangely, I do not find these appealing suggestions nor do I appreciate the insinuations that accompany them.

Or we could do something really easy like let set a minimum bank account balance of 3000 coins. (Bonus points if you make a templar and Guild-accessible list of such accounts accessed in the last month.) Or one of another dozen ideas I have that would have a similar effect. It would be so easy to change the basic incentives that lead to the problems I'm talking about, without affecting low-level survival or high-level wealth accumulation. I really do not understand the resistance here.

I'd love to hear your ideas (maybe in another thread?)  This idea about carrying your coins until you have 3000 of them is an intriguing start.

[Chettaman]

**edited below
I couldn't see nenyuk puting restrictions on how many little black stones they could possibly acquire. The new tax on coins is right up their alley, though.

I didn't mean to come so hostile. But I did.
In the real world, even people who aren't partying college students are bad with money. Adults who have been alive for more than fifty years, immature maybe or just ... listen, man. My brother lives in like a small commune (Four trailers and a shed) of trailers between mississippi and Louisiana. He's like 38 or something and his girlfriend is like 40/ 50 or something. All of the people who live in this place are adults who raise kids and go to work and live the life they understand. I'll admit, they do immature things like smoke weed and drink beer every night moment. But seriously... all these people have to come home to is hanging out with each other, smoking weed, drinking beer, chatting about whatever, playing dominoes or the card game phase ten. These people, I think you can call ignorant or maybe immature, whatever the case - they're living their lives however they see fit. And I'm sure they know exactly what kind of life they live... maybe ignorant is the wrong word. Maybe immature is the wrong word. I would say... broken. These people are broken. But it's the life they live and only an incredible change in whatever the problem is will ever give them a chance to change.

I promise you, I know what I'm talking about, because I've lived with more than one group like this - and this is America. I imagine in places where an armageddon-like life-style is reality - except drugs are much easier to acquire (like in armageddon). I imagine those people would or even /do/ act immature and literally blow all of their money on whatever they want, because they have nothing else to look forward to.

But. I've never been outside America as an "adult", so I can't speak with any experience about any other place.
That and I still need to get my own life together. I'm really starting to consider I'm just an idiot who doesn't know as much as he thinks he does.

No, no. If these god damn people all pooled their money and worked together as well as they fucking do now towards /saving/, they could be something incredible. How does this not make sense to them, right? How in the fucking world do they get up everyday, get drunk, get high, go to work and then come back, get drunker, get higher, go to bed and rinse and repeat?
... because it doesn't sound bad. These broken fools aren't even broken, man. They just may never become anything greater. Not because they can't, but because they got no reason to change up this routine that works and they enjoy it ''enough''.

There /are/ people who work towards better things. And there are people who don't believe there is anything better. - in comparison or otherwise. In armageddon it's a little different. In armageddon, they /are/ ignorant. They are the oppressed.

** as for the real world and frugality. (that word didn't get spell-checked, so it must be real!) But my idea of frugal is intense. I've walked miles at a time everyday while owning a vehicle. I've slept on floors and furniture, because beds aren't a necessity. Sometimes I didn't even own furniture. Just like crates and stuff. I've eaten nothing but peanut butter and banana sandwiches, because it's cheap and ramen makes me sick after enough of it. (but indulged regularly, because I love food) My idea of frugal is so frugal, it's probably another word. (probably insanity).
Man. What the hell is a car owner's tax in SC? Don't we already pay taxes to fix roads and stuff? SC&G is the company that generates and gives out electricity. What the fuck, man? I can generate electricity with two fridge magnets, copper fishing wire and any metal rod - and probably a bike or something. xD. - save $150 a month, right there. - and through this, if you could create your own engine that ran off of the electricity you created you wouldn't need gas for your car. Um... let's say you fill up once a week for $30. 30 x 4(weeks) = $120 a month Or you could just walk, bike or carpool. Let's say you know how to repair your own vehicle and you're even able to create all the things you need to do so. Bam - you save however much you would of actually paid someone else to do it. Food? Learn how to grow food and livestock.

150(electricity) + 120(gas) + car repair + Farming (I dunno, no experience farming)

If real people were as capable as the people in arm are... they'd be able to be rich. But even in this world, brainwashing is a reality. The ease and comfort of ''team work'' has made people lazy to the truth that they could just do it themselves. The idea that people have to get up and go to work so they can make money to have these things that they could take care of themselves isn't just an idea - it's how we live. It's how we survive now. I'm not saying it's bad... I'm just saying that's how it is. We /could/ be better - even as frugal as we already are. So why in the fuck do we get up every day, cook and eat breakfast that was gathered by someone else, brush our teeth, shower, go to work or school, go to work or school, go to work, come home, watch tv/ read books/ play video games/ or whatever, and then go to sleep to do the same thing?
because it's not so bad. It works.

again. I may just be an idiot twisting words.

[Desertman]

Yes, I could restrict my characters who are not supposed to be rich or become rich to fatalist, hedonist, spendthrift superstitious and paranoid bumpkins who know nothing about the world, its economy or the value of things. Strangely, I do not find these appealing suggestions nor do I appreciate the insinuations that accompany them.

Or we could do something really easy like let set a minimum bank account balance of 3000 coins. (Bonus points if you make a templar and Guild-accessible list of such accounts accessed in the last month.) Or one of another dozen ideas I have that would have a similar effect. It would be so easy to change the basic incentives that lead to the problems I'm talking about, without affecting low-level survival or high-level wealth accumulation. I really do not understand the resistance here.

This sounds like a fantastic way to ensure everyone rushes to 3,000 coins as soon as possible in order to secure their "starting hoard".

If anything all this does is ensures everyone in the world has at least 3,000 coins to their name.

This might be the worst idea I have ever heard if your goal is to make it so that people don't have so much money so easily.

As for The Guild and Templars being able to see bank accounts.....find out IC is all I'm going to say about that.

[hyzhenhok]

I couldn't see nenyuk puting restrictions on how many little black stones they could possibly acquire. The new tax on coins is right up their alley, though.

It's all quite the reverse, really. Banks want big deposits because they want big cash reserves because they want to be able to make big, profitable loans. Storing, recording, tracking, and providing ready access to money is costly. It's pretty questionable why Nenyuk only charges 10 sid to permanently and forever store 100 sid for rando commoners--surely, even taking into account the chance the commoner will forfeit his 100 sid for some reason, that isn't worth it for Nenyuk.

Yet for some reason Nenyuk's fees are very low for low depositors, and very expensive for high-value depositors. The high value depositors are the ones who Nenyuk should be letting in for free! There's a reason why it's so hard for my character to justify not using the bank--the value of the service provided is far higher than the price.

Abolish bank fees and introduce minimum balance for 2016.

This sounds like a fantastic way to ensure everyone rushes to 3,000 coins as soon as possible in order to secure their "starting hoard".

If anything all this does is ensures everyone in the world has at least 3,000 coins to their name.

This might be the worst idea I have ever heard if your goal is to make it so that people don't have so much money so easily.

Please explain your reasoning. I'm especially interested in the in-character reasoning that literally every character, from Bynner to rinth rat to raider to militiaman to beggar, will use to come to the conclusion that it's a good idea for them to save up 3000 coins just so they can open a bank account with Nenyuk.

[Desertman]

I couldn't see nenyuk puting restrictions on how many little black stones they could possibly acquire. The new tax on coins is right up their alley, though.

It's all quite the reverse, really. Banks want big deposits because they want big cash reserves because they want to be able to make big, profitable loans. Storing, recording, tracking, and providing ready access to money is costly. It's pretty questionable why Nenyuk only charges 10 sid to permanently and forever store 100 sid for rando commoners--surely, even taking into account the chance the commoner will forfeit his 100 sid for some reason, that isn't worth it for Nenyuk.

Yet for some reason Nenyuk's fees are very low for low depositors, and very expensive for high-value depositors. The high value depositors are the ones who Nenyuk should be letting in for free! There's a reason why it's so hard for my character to justify not using the bank--the value of the service provided in unquestionable way too good for the price.

Abolish bank fees and introduce minimum balance for 2016.

This sounds like a fantastic way to ensure everyone rushes to 3,000 coins as soon as possible in order to secure their "starting hoard".

If anything all this does is ensures everyone in the world has at least 3,000 coins to their name.

This might be the worst idea I have ever heard if your goal is to make it so that people don't have so much money so easily.

Please explain your reasoning. I'm especially interested in the in-character reasoning that literally every character, from Bynner to rinth rat to raider to militiaman to beggar, will come to the IC conclusion that it's a good idea for them to save up 3000 coins just so they can open a bank account with Nenyuk.

I'm not claiming they will have an IC reason for doing it.

I'm saying this will introduce a fantastic OOC reason for doing it, and people will.

I wish we played a game where people didn't do IC things for OOC reasons, but we don't. That's not the game we are playing. You have to keep the reality of your situation in mind before introducing changes.

[Chettaman]

I'm a firm believer in the banking systems being an IC construct /way/ more than it is an OOC one.

I imagine a dood storing 100 coins and paying 10 of those 100 coins. Now he has 90. - then he dies. Now Nenyuk has 90 + 10.
I imagine if a noble dood storing 100,000 coins and he has to give up 10,000. Now he has 90,000. - This character is far less likely to die. But even if he did die, their house would inherit the coins, I imagine. So Nenyuk gains little to nothing from a dead NOBLE person with so much coin. However if this person /is/ just a random frugal hunter, the rest of that 90,000 goes to Nenyuk.

But maybe you're right. I'm not sure how much it costs to keep records safe.
Guards, employees, uh... rent for the space maybe?  hm. I see what you're saying, I think.

While the employees get paid 100 a month - bla - random number - 100 x 100 = 100,000
I dunno how many apartments real or virtual are in the cities and how many actually get rented, but it just came to me that it must be more than enough to cover these costs. And so this banking thing just becomes a little thing on the side. (now that there /is/ a tax, anyway). In a larger scheme of things, the family /is/ profiting. Not from the bank alone, but in the larger scheme of things.
hm... but if they did want to make a profit solely from the bank, I dunno. I can't imagine people using the bank if they were taxed /heavily/.
Also to meet you both in the middle: a minimum of 500. It's a much more realistic number, if you ask me. 3000 makes a frugal freak like me squelch. To most of the oppressed in the cities they might never make it to 3000. While some will think,  "A bank account!" What a goal! I need one of those to be someone!"

but if it were 500 most of the people in the cities would think, "Eh. That's not too hard. Sure. Why not?"

[hyzhenhok]

Obviously the number isn't set in stone for the idea to work. The idea for this particular proposal, though, is you make getting a bank account an affirmative choice on the part of the character by making sure they need more money than they would usually have rolling around in their backpack.

My characters' threshold before they start to get annoyed/worried/weighed down by their purse ranges anywhere between 300 and 1000 coins, depending on the particular character, so I wanted to set the minimum a bit higher than that. I proposed 3000 because the higher the number, the more obvious its effect in encouraging players to think about and make choices ICly about what they do with their money. But I imagine something as low as 1500 would have some effect; I've certainly had characters who never had that much money at once.

[Grimlight]

I haven't played in a very long time -- I feel I've been gone for ten years, and have only recently come back to play, so maybe my opinion on this is a little dated.


Nenyuk would be in the business of increasing their wealth and political power; to be quite honest, I'm surprised -- from a thematic standpoint -- that they are tolerated as well as they are, and are as quiet as they are.  The are (presumably) trusted to hold the funds and assets of not just the common drudgery, but the nobility and templarate in both the north and south.  The closest comparable entity from Earth, in terms of raw power, would be the Pope to middle-ages Europe.  Of course, even the Pope had the Vatican -- Nenyuk physically resides in "every major city."  That means that they are not centralized, and the individual family members would be easily corruptible if offered more power.  In all the years that Armageddon has run, I'm not sure that they have ever addressed this: how either of the terribly pompous "Powers that Be" tolerate a non-noble house, free of any sworn allegiance, to single-handedly hold the power to crush the masses and sway a war is totally beyond me.  I'd personally would love to an RPT that would split Nenyuk or update the role that it plays.

I'm also a major fan of gritty realism.  Nenyuk acts like a giant Bag of Holding that transcends time and space, and for some reason, every single one of its agents and employees knows exactly who you are and what you look like, even if you're just some shitty Bynner, and whether you're alive or dead.  I know that a certain amount of suspension of disbelief is required for games, but we already have coins that have weight, so I see no reason to stop there.  

I actually like the banking deed idea.  It works very similar to the way you get a stub from a stable for your animal.  It doesn't have to involve anything anachronistic or theme-breaking (like literacy):  your slip could basically just be an assortment of symbols that Nenyuk would use to organize their business.  Things like a symbol for the city where the deposit exists, painted colored marks to represent large, small, tens, and ones of the balance, or symbols to denote the 'row and column' of a given safety deposit box.  If you are nobility, your stamp is marked with the seal of your house and you get treated like the awesome 'possum that you are -- and Krath help any poor soul of a commoner who shows up with a house-marked ticket and no matching signet ring.  (Although, I guess if you're wicked enough to get both the ticket, the signet ring, and the nice clothes -- well, you've already committed execution-worthy crimes, what's one more to add to the pile?)

But I would take it a bit further and segregate the major cities.  If you drop 10,000 coins off in Allanak, it doesn't magically just poof up in Tuluk, ready to be withdrawn.  This would accomplish a couple of things:  1, it makes the game more realistic, but still playable; 2, it allows a believable way for a templar or noble to seize assets within their own city, and 3, it ensures that players think more carefully about which city they are hanging around in and how they transport their money.  It'll mean that if you're going to go up north to load up on wood, and all of your money is in Allanak, you have to actually transport your own money or pay someone else to do it, and hope you don't get robbed along the way.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I have always supported the banking deed idea fully.

[Chettaman]

banking deeds that use thumb prints to identify who's who! - or something of this nature.

this way - if someone came up to the table and was like, "Here's my multipass, ya nenyuk bastard! I need to make a withdrawl!"
"So you do, breed. ... Now match your thumb print to the one on the deed."
"Well I..."
"you can't?! Oh, sorry. Guess all the money is ours now, suckuh! Muahahaha!"

also - people should be charged to waste nenyuk time when checking their balance. Damn peasants.

[Grimlight]

banking deeds that use thumb prints to identify who's who! - or something of this nature.

this way - if someone came up to the table and was like, "Here's my multipass, ya nenyuk bastard! I need to make a withdrawl!"
"So you do, breed. ... Now match your thumb print to the one on the deed."
"Well I..."
"you can't?! Oh, sorry. Guess all the money is ours now, suckuh! Muahahaha!"

also - people should be charged to waste nenyuk time when checking their balance. Damn peasants.

*roleplays cutting victim's hand off, degloving them, and slipping their fingers on, then wishes up*  >]