Armageddon General Discussion Board

So, I had this thought:

You can leave a locked apartment (without a key), but you can't enter a locked apartment (without a key).

This would dramatically affect a very classic murder strategy -- but I've always found that murder strategy to be borderline meta, and certainly lame.  (It's been a couple years since I was apartment murdered, and ever since then I cringe when I read the word '*click*'.)

I don't think the timeless strategy of 'Trap them in a meeting place' is exactly meta, or something that needs to be removed from the game.

I still say, stop blocking people from entering apartment buildings just because they don't rent there. Let people use "knock door" more... anyone thats gonna break in isn't scared of your guards anyway.

So far as the locked room.... in the MODERN world? This makes sense. You lock with a key on one side, but the other you can just twist. I'm alright with Zalanthan locks requiring the use of a key on either side.

Quote from: Riev on August 27, 2016, 11:19:25 PM
I still say, stop blocking people from entering apartment buildings just because they don't rent there. Let people use "knock door" more... anyone thats gonna break in isn't scared of your guards anyway.

Yeah this. Anyone going to burglarize/assasinate generally has the sneakyness to get past the guards anyway. What if Amos just wants to drop by, for
non murdery purposes to check if someone 's home. Oh and this severly limits any door-to-door salesman concepts!

I recall awhile back, there were parties and card games over the Gaj. Someone always had to come downstairs to let the guests upstairs from the bar. In the real world there'd be a buzzer, or at the very least, a concierge or red-hat to let the list of approved guests up.  Can't do that with Armageddon, but the next-best thing (and much more in keeping with the murder/betrayal conspiracy harshness them) would be to not have doormen at all.

Once upon a time, there were individual apartments and houses, that had no guards, and no NPC to hand you your key. You either had your key, or you had a lockpick, or you didn't get in, period. If you were the tenant and lost your key, you were SOL til you could find the PC agent to get you a new one.

I kinda miss those days. It made burglars scarier. Now, they just seem like a "I'll make money by picking every door in this building, now that I'm past the guard" kind of thing. One-shot wonders. Used to be scary because breaking in meant yhou might be seen by the soldier walking up the road. And you ran that risk for most of your attempts.

I both like and do not like this idea.

I like the aspect of having someone outside of the apartment complex being able to walk in and knock.  Having friends over and all that, as brought up.

I don't like the idea because, like many, I've had some "bad" experiences with burglars in the past.  Being burgled can lead to some great RP and character development, but when you find out they stole everything ludicrously heavy to carry or sneak out..then I start just rolling my eyes.

Maybe this has been fixed and I am just not aware.  Can anyone tell me if dragging something behind you or carrying a bed, a keg and three chests prevents you from sneaking/hiding?

My biggest gripe with apartment slayings is my PCs would be caught dead saying "errr, an apartment? I don't go to apartments. Those are scary death traps!" So ooc, I might know what's coming. But IC, it's a sticky wicket. Then you are "that guy" and the meta tables suddenly flip.

I mean one exit places are suspicious, granted. But you usually don't assume the #2 reason to rent an apartment meant is to murder people, IC.

I mean maybe apartments have a different purpose in Zalanthas haha.

"Not a Rinthi, but looking to store your stuff, bone people, and kill your enemies where soldiers won't notice? Look no further than Nenyuks Gaj Estate Apartments! Cheap affordable housing and non-stain performance flooring. Maximum occupancy, inquire with Landlord. His name is Googamooga. The great. "

I don't think apartments need to change much. Really this is just a subset of our binary crime code. Pick, sneak/hide, burglery all don't set off crime code meters, because the reaction of the law is worse than Rodney King in 91. You will literally be murdered in the street for resisting arrest over stealing a fruit. By like 8 half Giants. Without more nuance to crime code, putting more grey area crime within its grasp would further stifle crime activity to the point of non existence.

To get down to basics, the reason people murder in apartments is it guarantees secrecy, and adds immensely to the attackers chance of success. Murderimg someone in a lawful area is definitely possible, but requires greater skill, planning, and a greater risk.

I'd personally like to see murder and corpses out in the streets, rather than locked up in an apartment. It always felt cheap because there's no way out. But then again, Zalanthas is a brutal place.

In essence I think more attention in a broad stroke could be focused on crime code rather than apartments specifically. I don't think locked apartments are bad, but I do like that new apartments for the most part have two entrances.

I would rather have crime code operate as it does at night 24/7, and rely on brain patrolled NPC human soldiers to spot crime and attempt to arrest someone. Remove stationary soldiers except those guarding entrances. Have overlap, delays, open spots. Give soldiers billy clubs and subdue priority, with mercy on and attempts to knock out rather than murder. Grade up if the crime is past petty.

It all sounds simple but obviously it isn't. Coding a realistic yet pragmatic crime code sounds like a fun nightmare.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 28, 2016, 01:40:32 AM
My biggest gripe with apartment slayings is my PCs would be caught dead saying "errr, an apartment? I don't go to apartments. Those are scary death traps!" So ooc, I might know what's coming. But IC, it's a sticky wicket. Then you are "that guy" and the meta tables suddenly flip.

I mean one exit places are suspicious, granted. But you usually don't assume the #2 reason to rent an apartment meant is to murder people, IC.

I mean maybe apartments have a different purpose in Zalanthas haha.

"Not a Rinthi, but looking to store your stuff, bone people, and kill your enemies where soldiers won't notice? Look no further than Nenyuks Gaj Estate Apartments! Cheap affordable housing and non-stain performance flooring. Maximum occupancy, inquire with Landlord. His name is Googamooga. The great. "

I don't think apartments need to change much. Really this is just a subset of our binary crime code. Pick, sneak/hide, burglery all don't set off crime code meters, because the reaction of the law is worse than Rodney King in 91. You will literally be murdered in the street for resisting arrest over stealing a fruit. By like 8 half Giants. Without more nuance to crime code, putting more grey area crime within its grasp would further stifle crime activity to the point of non existence.

To get down to basics, the reason people murder in apartments is it guarantees secrecy, and adds immensely to the attackers chance of success. Murderimg someone in a lawful area is definitely possible, but requires greater skill, planning, and a greater risk.

I'd personally like to see murder and corpses out in the streets, rather than locked up in an apartment. It always felt cheap because there's no way out. But then again, Zalanthas is a brutal place.

In essence I think more attention in a broad stroke could be focused on crime code rather than apartments specifically. I don't think locked apartments are bad, but I do like that new apartments for the most part have two entrances.

I would rather have crime code operate as it does at night 24/7, and rely on brain patrolled NPC human soldiers to spot crime and attempt to arrest someone. Remove stationary soldiers except those guarding entrances. Have overlap, delays, open spots. Give soldiers billy clubs and subdue priority, with mercy on and attempts to knock out rather than murder. Grade up if the crime is past petty.

It all sounds simple but obviously it isn't. Coding a realistic yet pragmatic crime code sounds like a fun nightmare.

This right here. And - put a soldier in every apartment complex patrolling. It's a well-known fact now in-game that murders happen in apartment buildings yet - no one asks questions when only one person leaves the apartment...ever. Then, shocker, a dead body. I can't tell you how many times IG people have refused to step into apartments - because they are notorious for being death traps. And the utter obliviousness of the people handing out the keys/doorman. Sure , those two people entered, sure, only one left with a barrel of cleaning fluid....but that other guy or gal never left. /ever/.

I've only been apartment killed once, and I always follow strangers with candy.

Quote from: Armaddict on August 27, 2016, 11:09:39 PM
I don't think the timeless strategy of 'Trap them in a meeting place' is exactly meta, or something that needs to be removed from the game.

I agree with this.

Do I do it? No. I prefer to find more entertaining ways to murder mundanely, and plus.. who wants to clean up the body in your own crib? Go to their crib and you don't have to get out the bloodstains. Bonus points if you kill someone in the middle of the street, a feat I've pulled off only twice since the crim code changes way back when.

I did once slay someone in the Sun King's Sanctuary once which is probably still my favorite kill to this day.

I also killed two pc's once who attacked me while I had internet trouble and was afk.. that's a close second.  ;D

That *click*

I don't mind the meta aspect. The game has gaps that lack realism, and we can chose to approach that as a gamer and give our characters supportive reasoning, or primarily as characters and try to keep our ooc knowledge out of the picture. They're both completely valid and good. I have no problem with the players who understand the code and correct their play to allow for a longer lived role or to get the upper hand.

A crim code revamp is a good idea. Reiloth, you make some nice jabs at a few of the major problems. There's no scale for crime severity. Running is death. There are, can we fix this first, so many half giant guards. If we're going to leave them, let's amend the docs to account for the Allanaki half giant army.

I'm not sure how I feel about nauta's suggested change. Maybe it could be given a trial run on one of the commoner apartment buildings and we could see how it plays out for a bit.

Play testing is good and fun.

Apartment killings are lame and meta as fuck. They rely on the ooc assumptions that the vnpc's next door won't report any suspicious goings on in the next hobble. Or that the apartment clerk won't notice someone not returning from said apartment.

But generally you don't have to worry about vnpc's. Their family isn't going to come by and ask any questions. The servants won't notice when you dismember a body in your office.

No need to give any fucks about the virtual world.

Other people's apartments not meta.

But yeah. Take the vnpc population into account. At least wish up.

I don't think being killed over resisting arrest is really a bad thing, when you have the easily available option of turning on nosave arrest.  This is Allanak.  You have no civil rights.

Otherwise, being crim-flagged is just a roll of the dice to see whether you can pass your flee and hide checks.  Without the possibility of death, there's no down-side to resisting:  if you pass, you get away...if you fail, the end result is exactly the same as if you hadn't resisted at all...so there is no incentive -not- to resist.

Especially when subdue is really janky (only 1 person can subdue you at a time) and there are no handcuffs or shackles.

Quote from: Inks on August 28, 2016, 12:58:04 PM
Other people's apartments not meta.

But yeah. Take the vnpc population into account. At least wish up.

That's just yer old timey assassination. Good clean fun.

Quote from: Synthesis on August 28, 2016, 01:00:16 PM
I don't think being killed over resisting arrest is really a bad thing, when you have the easily available option of turning on nosave arrest.  This is Allanak.  You have no civil rights.

Otherwise, being crim-flagged is just a roll of the dice to see whether you can pass your flee and hide checks.  Without the possibility of death, there's no down-side to resisting:  if you pass, you get away...if you fail, the end result is exactly the same as if you hadn't resisted at all...so there is no incentive -not- to resist.

Especially when subdue is really janky (only 1 person can subdue you at a time) and there are no handcuffs or shackles.

The only standing issue with nosave arrest is if you are currently in combat, you can't be subdued. So soldiers will just gank you instead.

QuoteNo need to give any fucks about the virtual world.

I think you need to remember that the virtual world fears templars.  You make it sound like everyone is very dutiful and eager to go pointing fingers at people who just killed someone to a templar who might kill them for wasting their time with the report of it.  The whole 'fear of the upper class' isn't situational for most of the virtual world, it's omnipresent.

That isn't to say that you -should- ignore the virtual world, but before you go off on a little tangent like that, you should at least remember the qualities of the virtual world that you are, once again, seeming to transpose next to what the virtual world of real life would be (I will emphasize 'seeming', because that is how it seems to me).  Life is cheap on zalanthas, and not everyone is eager to get tangled up in plots that just got someone else killed, and the thing about that virtual world is that they do virtual things.  The 'neighbors' aren't virtual.  They're real.  The apartments are coded in for PC's, and they aren't home; if they notice something, they will be around.

It is not metagaming.  Once again, I think you're just averse to anything that results in character death.  Meanwhile, we have an entire other thread about a powerful skill being useless because people can run away from it too easily.  Then one of the most common 'plotting' events in literature and history (trapping someone in closed room or place where they can be stuck), and 'simplest' way to plan for escape, is attacked as metagaming.

If you're unwilling to go into an apartment with someone, that's probably a sure sign that you don't trust them yet, and that's not some terrible crime against the purpose of apartments, nor is it a wonky side effect of game code.

I've been trying to figure out how to put my difficulty with this suggestion into words that would make sense to someone.  It's true that it's a little gamey that you can kill people in apartments and get away with it, but it's also gamey how ridiculously difficult it is to do it otherwise and get away with it.  There is so much codedly on the side of the victim in this game, some of which don't make a lot of sense either.

There's a considerable amount of RP involved in earning trust and luring a victim someplace you can lock them in, too.  I've worked for IG years on people at times.

So I think it's ok the way it is.

Quote from: Refugee on August 28, 2016, 02:18:44 PM
There's a considerable amount of RP involved in earning trust and luring a victim someplace you can lock them in, too.  I've worked for IG years on people at times.

So I think it's ok the way it is.

I often have my characters show their level of trust, and judge someone else's level of trust, through the whole locked apartment scenario.
Like Refugee said, there can be a considerable amount of RP involved and a lot of opportunities for character development.
I like it the way it is. 

As a note, it's not that I think everything is perfect as is.  But there are other changes to be made to apartments that would make this scenario very different and make burglary better.  (I proposed an idea awhile back for the simple 'sliding bolt' lock to be in place, to promote people actually sleeping in their apartments/being in their apartments).

But in the context of this idea, and the current framework of code, I think this is kind of a one-sided proposal that doesn't really fix anything in the game.

If anything, making it harder to shadow into apartments would be a good thing that might alleviate some of the more 'gamey' versions of this, while leaving the more sensical versions (deceiving someone into trusting you behind a locked door) of it intact.  Promote breaking in after they're already in, rather than following them in.  Something of that nature, for the quick fix to this (and honestly, this step might have already been done; it's been proposed a bunch of times).

QuoteI think you need to remember that the virtual world fears templars.  You make it sound like everyone is very dutiful and eager to go pointing fingers at people who just killed someone to a templar who might kill them for wasting their time with the report of it.  The whole 'fear of the upper class' isn't situational for most of the virtual world, it's omnipresent.

That isn't to say that you -should- ignore the virtual world, but before you go off on a little tangent like that, you should at least remember the qualities of the virtual world that you are, once again, seeming to transpose next to what the virtual world of real life would be (I will emphasize 'seeming', because that is how it seems to me).  Life is cheap on zalanthas, and not everyone is eager to get tangled up in plots that just got someone else killed, and the thing about that virtual world is that they do virtual things.  The 'neighbors' aren't virtual.  They're real.  The apartments are coded in for PC's, and they aren't home; if they notice something, they will be around.

I guess npc's shouldn't report my pickpocket because they fear the templarate as well. Maybe they shouldn't report to the templarate if I try to kill them directly. By all means they seem to have the agency of your average sheep. I bet it's just a coincidence that it's a good justification for getting away with  questionable player killing.

The rest of your post isn't worth a response.

I agree, the shadowing into apartments thing is kind of questionable. Is it possible? Yes, I imagine it is, but it should be very difficult. Making it so just anyone could walk by the desk, but making it harder to stay hidden in the hallways and, particularly the apartments themselves, would change the equation a good bit, in a way that would improve the game in my opinion. I kind of like the idea of anyone being able to unlock the door from the inside for OOC practicality, as, when I lock the door and a guest is over, and I end up going linkdead or having a RL emergencey, I'd like them to be able to get out... however, my OOC convenience probably shouldn't be the biggest priority when considering changes to the game.

In light of Jingo's deep, penetrating gaze, I must change my stance.

This idea cannot be implemented because it will prevent me from being a homicidal maniac, you guys are purposely trying to remove every code advantage I have.  My only purpose here is to troll your game, and that's all that I've done for my entire tenure here. How dare you make this a game for carebears.  The only reason I stuck with this game so long was to acquire more knowledge than you and turn it on you, and you're ruining it.

lol cry me a river

I think it'd be nice if the front door maybe let you out of it, but there was another door inside. The old 'Please, step into my office.' trick. It'd make parties easier to get to, and murder still easy to commit!

I've never had an apartment so far. One day, I hope to have these problems.

While the apartment kill technique, or locked door or what have you can seem like an unfair advantage, and yeah, wish up before doing it so staff can decide any reaction the virtual world may have (generally a good idea, but not always practical in spur of the moment things, I've heard it's bad form to wish up like, five seconds before you ding someone, but I prefer it to be more pre-planned if I can do so), if any. I agree with Armaddict's point, approaching a Templar about a scuffle that might have been more of an intense sparring match, which people use their apartments for sometimes as well, or just some really rough mudsex, would probably not occur to a vNPC as the brightest of ideas, because, what if they're wrong? What if the Templar just up and decides they'd be excellent for the arena?

Thing is, Templars do what they want. They selectively enforce the law as suits their interests and are highly corrupt. The Templar the vNPC goes to may have been bribed by the killer beforehand, and might just end up being a loose end that needs tying off. Now, is it disturbing that a murder took place next door? Yes, but they happen all the time. I've lived in neighborhoods where the biggest rules are mind your own damn business, and never call the cops, because the cops will come out with itchy trigger fingers and you never know WHAT might happen. Also, they'll show up way too late to do anything. In light of all this, killing someone in your apartment is totally legit. It's not like CSI is going to show up carefully bagging evidence and maintaining the scene of the crime.

In fact, in Zalanthas, once reported, the authorities are pretty much obligated to arrest someone, and, you could be accused of reporting it to avoid suspicion. You witness a murder or see a body in the streets? Welp, sucks to be that guy, but I don't want to get fed to the Gaj, so I didn't see shit.

Quote from: Refugee on August 28, 2016, 02:18:44 PM
I've been trying to figure out how to put my difficulty with this suggestion into words that would make sense to someone.  It's true that it's a little gamey that you can kill people in apartments and get away with it, but it's also gamey how ridiculously difficult it is to do it otherwise and get away with it.  There is so much codedly on the side of the victim in this game, some of which don't make a lot of sense either.

There's a considerable amount of RP involved in earning trust and luring a victim someplace you can lock them in, too.  I've worked for IG years on people at times.

So I think it's ok the way it is.

This is about spot on. I don't think it's overly gamey to use apartments to kill people -- As it stands, on the other hand, it takes a lot of preparation and skill to take people out on the street/in broad daylight or nightlight and get away with it. The crime code is against you, and the victim typically has the advantage in that fleeing is quite easy without precautions to reduce their ability to flee.

Some zany ideas:

*Increasing the difficulty in fleeing from combat, once initiated. Delays to things like flee, or increased stamina loss. Perhaps cumulatively running reduces stamina over time (so when you first start running, the first few rooms are X stamina, the second few rooms are Y stamina, and the rest are Z stamina until you rest. How many rooms between X, Y, and Z is based on your endurance.

*Having difficulty shouting/talking during combat. You can, but similar to 'flee', you might not be able to concentrate enough to get out a shout or say. Perhaps dependent on combat skills, allowing for the Duelist to mock you repeatedly.

*Only allow for patrolling soldiers, as stated above. So combat in the streets is technically possible, and knowing which parts are the 'bad parts of town' that aren't patrolled as much suits your advantage as a criminal. It also behooves the wise traveler to not take certain streets at night, making these actually 'the bad parts of town'. So instead of a world of extremes, like the Labyrinth, where there is no law and order, you can have bad neighborhoods within say, the Commoner Quarter, and better patrolled neighborhoods. AoD can supplement patrols with PC presence. Could put them on cycles, so that certain areas of the city are better patrolled at different times of the year. Base it off the moon cycle to keep it cryptic.r

*Allow for degrees of crime, and responses to the crime that suit. Having pillories and gibbets near the pile of corpses where pickpockets and thieves are kept, possibly for days on end until they starve to death (Have it be a public prison basically, where people can either slip them a lock pick, or throw fruit at them). Putting them in public allows for public interaction, making jail time less of an annoying AFK unless a Templar is around. Deals can be made, feces can be thrown.

*Have Soldiers be mostly human. Humans are a surmountable obstacle, dangerous to some, and especially in numbers. But the amount of half-giant soldiers in game is a bit ludicrous. They should be summonable by Templar PCs, but otherwise, not just sitting around, IMHO.

*Do away with automatic crime code attached to a crime within populated areas of a city/outpost. Unless witnessed by a soldier in that room, or perhaps an adjacent room for some actions (Firing a bow, something quite obvious, murder for instance), crime code must be appended by a PC.

*Have critical fails in populated rooms lead to (minor) crime code attached to a Burglar.

*Have landlord NPCs report people's sdescs seen beyond the rental point (even hooded) to Templars unless they are following a tenant of the building. This includes shadowing. So a Burglar going ham on an apartment complex would most certainly be automatically noticed and reported.

The worst that can happen:

*People commit more crime and get away with it.
*Streets become more dangerous.
*Burglars aren't invincible any longer.
*Puts more emphasis on day-to-day operation of the AoD, and Criminals. As a Criminal, you can get away with more. As a PC AoD member, you are more empowered to find and report criminals, as the NPCs will not be doing the job for you as much.
*Different parts of town become dynamically bad parts of town. Sometimes this improves based on AoD efforts, but if one area gets better, another gets worse.
*Move away from the Binary "Labyrinth is Bad, rest of Allanak is 100% protected" paradigm.
*Move away from the Binary "All of Luirs is off limits".

I'm all for the crimcode changes which would...not make this 'more gamey', but less prevalent.

That and it would allow that thing I've been wanting for a long time:  Street wars between clans!  Not open war, but close.

Quote from: Armaddict on August 28, 2016, 05:19:44 PM
I'm all for the crimcode changes which would...not make this 'more gamey', but less prevalent.

That and it would allow that thing I've been wanting for a long time:  Street wars between clans!  Not open war, but close.

Do you bite your thumb at me, sir?

Yeah, definitely could get behind those changes. The objective of the AoD is not to solve ALL crimes, just to keep up the appearance of law and order.

And WTF with all these HG soldiers? Granted there should be a few, mostly accompanying  Templars, but for the most part the soldiers should be human. I'd really like to see some improvements to Storm and Luir's code, but, something tells me that's not happening. Storm and Luir's are thematically places where you're not supposed to fuck around.

npcs report to soldiers who report to a higher ranking soldier who reports to a templar, just to say "this fuck stole from some dude in plain sight"

npcs 99% of the time are not reporting directly to a templar because that would be fucking retarded.

I avoid players who do this. It's gotten to the point where I avoid certain clans and certain leaders because they either do it themselves or they enable minions to do it.

It's a good way to prevent conflict though, if that's your game plan. If I can't engage in even minor friction with another player without running the risk of playing the backroom trap game; then I guess I'll just play a happy dopey fucker that likes everyone and is friends with everyone.

The only time a conflict really ends is when the person you are having the conflict with dies.

Up until that point, even if you have a truce or have "made friends", there is still the slim possibility they are just playing you until you have your back turned and they can end you.

For this very real reason a lot people feel the best course of action is to skip the foreplay and move right to the end game.

Get rid of the current/potential/future threat and move on as the victor not having to look over your shoulder.

With that being said I've intentionally let people go with minor punishments or something similar knowing it might come back to haunt me one day because that can be fun.

I've also cut people down on the spot if I felt they might be a real potential threat in the future and I didn't want to risk that.

I have also told people we have had truces or that we had agreements in the past only to intentionally kill them the first chance I had for reasons specific to that character.

Now, as for doing it in an apartment, I can't say I recall doing this very many times. I can actually only recall one time where I did it for sure, and that was many years ago.

However, I don't see an issue with it. It's a smart play and completely realistic.

If I was living in the ancient Roman times and I had a senator I hated secretly that I wanted to kill I would absolutely invite him over to my place for drinks. I would get him inside, lock my door to make sure he couldn't easily escape, have a drink with him, then stab him to death.

It makes perfect sense so I don't see the issue other than, "You killed me so good I didn't even get a chance to escape because you are smarter than me and that makes me mad.".

Gotta win gotta win gotta win.

It is so disappointing players think this is a cool thing to do. I'd rather just twink my characters and play armageddon like the shitty pvp game it is.

The good news is that when you find yourself in competition with someone who relies on a locked room to kill anyone (and those players are generally not hard to spot), you have effective invulnerability by simply not going in to locked rooms.

Unless the locked-room scrub is mudsexing a templar 8 hours a day or something.

Wasn't this thread originally about door guards?

I don't think there should be guards on apartments, except for the higher class ones. And even then there should be alternative methods of entry.

Breaking in and murdering people in apartments is sometimes the only way to get rid of shitty sponsored roles.

Originally it was about the idea that maybe if you were in a locked apartment, you could leave, but you couldn't re-lock the door. Sort of a one-side-only lock. Presumably because it would cut down on apartment murders, and apartment shadowers who break their tools.

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 12:44:30 PM
Gotta win gotta win gotta win.

It is so disappointing players think this is a cool thing to do. I'd rather just twink my characters and play armageddon like the shitty pvp game it is.

Why is everything you post in every code thread some variation of "if you do something with the game code involved and someone dies, you're just a shitty twink who has to win win win and you're just using the code to your advantage to be a shitty player"?

Man, I thought -I- was a jaded veteran.
We get it.  You've had PCs die in shitty ways.  Everyone has, join the club. 
That doesn't mean that everyone who has killed someone through the use of some sort of code is a shitty player who is only here to win. 
And when a player argues for the code to either change or stay as is, so that risks remain in game, it doesn't mean they are trying to use some knowledge learned long ago, just to kill other PCs.


On topic: As I said before, I think that apartments are fine as they are.  I've had many instances where I've had PCs gauge someone's trust based on their reactions to being behind a locked (or unlocked) door.  I've also had many instances where I've been the one behind the locked door and I've showed my trust, or discomfort, to another player.  It opened up a lot of RP and character development that wouldn't have happened if I knew I could just walk out if I suddenly got worried I was at risk. 

Quote from: manipura on August 30, 2016, 02:53:42 PM

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 12:44:30 PM
Gotta win gotta win gotta win.

It is so disappointing players think this is a cool thing to do. I'd rather just twink my characters and play armageddon like the shitty pvp game it is.

Why is everything you post in every code thread some variation of "if you do something with the game code involved and someone dies, you're just a shitty twink who has to win win win and you're just using the code to your advantage to be a shitty player"?

I believe it has something to do with the sentiment expressed in Desertman's post:

Quote from: Desertman on August 30, 2016, 12:21:43 PM
The only time a conflict really ends is when the person you are having the conflict with dies.

Up until that point, even if you have a truce or have "made friends", there is still the slim possibility they are just playing you until you have your back turned and they can end you.

For this very real reason a lot people feel the best course of action is to skip the foreplay and move right to the end game.

Get rid of the current/potential/future threat and move on as the victor not having to look over your shoulder. [the notorious "zero sum" mindset -Skeelz]

The frustration comes from the play-to-survive-at-all-costs mentality. Getting someone in a locked room is hands down the easiest and safest way to kill them. Personally I wish we had less crimcode so people could be ambushed more effectively in the streets.

Quote from: Desertman on August 30, 2016, 12:21:43 PM
Now, as for doing it in an apartment, I can't say I recall doing this very many times. I can actually only recall one time where I did it for sure, and that was many years ago.

However, I don't see an issue with it. It's a smart play and completely realistic.

If I was living in the ancient Roman times and I had a senator I hated secretly that I wanted to kill I would absolutely invite him over to my place for drinks. I would get him inside, lock my door to make sure he couldn't easily escape, have a drink with him, then stab him to death.

It makes perfect sense so I don't see the issue other than, "You killed me so good I didn't even get a chance to escape because you are smarter than me and that makes me mad.".

I also have to disagree on whether apartment-killing is realistic. Roman Senators didn't invite each other over for dinner to murder one another. You'd either see someone judicially murdered (tried in a kangaroo court) and/or politically out-maneuvered so that suicide was the only way to spare one's family or dignity, etc. Think more Tuluk than Allanak.

Inviting people in to your home and then murdering them tends to carry severe social and political repercussions across all societies. I'm more familiar with the concept of "Guest right" from a Medieval concept, but even in antiquity killing your guest was considered extremely poor form. It's tantamount to betrayal, and few people would trust a known betrayer. Julius Caesar executed at least a few people who had betrayed and killed enemies of Caesar as rewarding them would set a bad precedent. In Zalanthas, people who have a habit of giving guests a one-way ticket to their apartments or estates should quickly become known for it.

All that said, my personal historical favorite means of settling political disputes was rousing a mob and heaving the offending party torn apart in the streets. Which happens to feed back in to my desire for less crimcode

Quote from: manipura on August 30, 2016, 02:53:42 PM

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 12:44:30 PM
Gotta win gotta win gotta win.

It is so disappointing players think this is a cool thing to do. I'd rather just twink my characters and play armageddon like the shitty pvp game it is.

Why is everything you post in every code thread some variation of "if you do something with the game code involved and someone dies, you're just a shitty twink who has to win win win and you're just using the code to your advantage to be a shitty player"?

Man, I thought -I- was a jaded veteran.
We get it.  You've had PCs die in shitty ways.  Everyone has, join the club.  
That doesn't mean that everyone who has killed someone through the use of some sort of code is a shitty player who is only here to win.  
And when a player argues for the code to either change or stay as is, so that risks remain in game, it doesn't mean they are trying to use some knowledge learned long ago, just to kill other PCs.

Pretty much. I've been killed by players in ways that I wouldn't even consider because of how lame it is. I've been meta'd by players I gave the benefit of the doubt to. And yes I consider it twinky hogshit.

Now explain to me why the fuck I should continue in good faith? Give me a reason why I shouldn't be angry?

Quote
I also have to disagree on whether apartment-killing is realistic. Roman Senators didn't invite each other over for dinner to murder one another. You'd either see someone judicially murdered (tried in a kangaroo court) and/or politically out-maneuvered so that suicide was the only way to spare one's family or dignity, etc. Think more Tuluk than Allanak.

Inviting people in to your home and then murdering them tends to carry severe social and political repercussions across all societies. I'm more familiar with the concept of "Guest right" from a Medieval concept, but even in antiquity killing your guest was considered extremely poor form. It's tantamount to betrayal, and few people would trust a known betrayer. Julius Caesar executed at least a few people who had betrayed and killed enemies of Caesar as rewarding them would set a bad precedent. In Zalanthas, people who have a habit of giving guests a one-way ticket to their apartments or estates should quickly become known for it.

All that said, my personal historical favorite means of settling political disputes was rousing a mob and heaving the offending party torn apart in the streets. Which happens to feed back in to my desire for less crimcode

Old school assassination is another one the romans liked.  And I would seriously like to see more of it. Titus Pullo did some hitman work in Rome and I keep wondering why that sort of thing rarely shows up in armageddon reletive to key-lock assassinations that every leader and their mother seems to prefer. (I mean I know the answer, it's hard. But backroom killings are easypeasylemonsqueezy.)

That's the rub. People, as a general rule, will take the path of least resistance.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 30, 2016, 04:02:07 PM
That's the rub. People, as a general rule, will take the path of least resistance.

Exactly. And in the present way Crime Code works, the path of least resistance is an apartment killing.

Now -- An Apartment killing isn't a walk in the park. It either requires skill (Sneak/Hide/Shadow/Kill, because we aren't backstabbing here), and/or RP (Convincing the person they aren't going to be murdered when they go into the apartment, or making them feel at ease (both as a player and a PC) and then killing them).

However -- For reasons stated by many -- The 'meta' aspect to me is that PCs of mine and probably of others wouldn't consider the Apartment to be the 'Death Trap' that it currently is. As a one-way exit, your PC doesn't necessarily know that apartment is impossible to get out of, do they? So, they might be suspicious of doors that lock in general, as a rule I find that totally acceptable. However, I saw a lot of this in Tuluk:

"My employer said I can't go into apartments alone with people."

or

"Apartments? I'd never set foot in one unless I had to."

I mean -- That struck me as a little meta, a little too aware of the danger that an apartment might present, simply by being a room that one party can lock and the other cannot (easily) unlock.

So -- I would look at the overarching issue here, rather than apartments as a microcosm. As a path of least resistance, and most reward vs risk, the apartment is the easy answer. Your victim cannot get away, you are assuredly able to get the drop on them (first few attacks while they are unarmed), and you can dispose of the body without being seen, and you will likely not be spotted committing the crime. To a criminal, it hits every mark for "Yes, please".

However, we should ask ourselves -- Should people so easily get away with a murder? While I am all for murder, corruption, and betrayal, and i've been on both sides of the coin (committed and been committed to apartment murder), one has to wonder if this is where we want our murders taking place -- Behind closed doors, and away from possible risk.

It's a bit of a large question, because what could be tweaked in order to make Apartment Murders one of a few different options? As it stands:

*It's relatively easy for the victim to get away, and to way their friends the description of their murderer/raider. Fleeing, and then running. No problemo.

*It's relatively difficult for a murderer to chase their victim, if they do get away. Double-back-switch-back-fleeing is very possible, and without actual graphics or 'line of sight', it's hard to keep an eye on someone, even if you just brutally stabbed them.

*Populated rooms within a city mean almost certain death for your PC, especially if you are caught in 'delay'. You could not-resist arrest, but if you attack someone and a soldier walks in, they cannot subdue you, and will instead attempt to kill you.

When we are talking about risk vs reward, it's a clear cut answer. Get your victim somewhere that makes it hard to flee (Apartment with a lockable door), get them somewhere where you as the attacker will not need to chase them around unrealistically (See above), and get them somewhere that the binary crime code does not kick in (A private apartment).

While I do applaud people who go through the effort to find a more realistic setting for murder, I do understand that the options available to them are limited and few. If you really want to make sure someone will die when you attack them, an apartment is a surefire way to go. Expanding these options somehow would be exciting to say the least, I think both for a 'victim' and a potential 'assailant'.

When a Guild Boss has to wonder aloud 'how are we going to get them into an apartment', it feels that something is a little funky.

Definitely, adjust the risk vs. reward for an assassination outside an apartment, and you will see fewer locked door kills. It feels clunky for me when I have to not lock my door when guests come over because that might cause them to panic, yet the risk outside the door is greater still and indeed, people do walk around checking doors to see if they'll open. I know some players try very hard to avoid killing people in apartments, particularly their own, but in places like Storm, where ELSE can you do it? I suppose you could lure them out onto the sands with a little creativity and forthought. Yeah, eh, there are ways to avoid it, but I can see why it happens. Conflicted and unsure about what I'd like to see.

I spend a lot of time in areas where crim-code will not save your ass, it's not so bad, it just means you have to be even more careful who you're an asshole to if you don't want to get diced.

QuoteI also have to disagree on whether apartment-killing is realistic. Roman Senators didn't invite each other over for dinner to murder one another. You'd either see someone judicially murdered (tried in a kangaroo court) and/or politically out-maneuvered so that suicide was the only way to spare one's family or dignity, etc. Think more Tuluk than Allanak.

I have to say that historically speaking, the events you speak of are certainly the ones that are remembered/admired over a thousand years later.  But if you really think some simple underhanded shit didn't happen involving a simple deceit such as coming over and getting killed by surprise, I think you're romanticizing it a little much to keep it more in line with that Tuluk/Allanak comparison.  I am kind of a pragmatist, and I really doubt that every roman scheme required intricate webs unless the target was someone where there would be a public uproar over it (edit: i.e. This isn't a world filled with roman senators...and even if it was, not all of them receive the benefit of having the entire military hell bent on avenging their death).

I agree with the overall synopsis of Reiloth's posts (among others, but he's the forefront); a lot of this has to do with the hard-line 'no' that is experienced elsewhere, making not getting seen paramount to the successful scheme.  Even if a templar is corrupt and open to bribes, it becomes a gamble to rely on it too heavily.  While I still have absolutely no problem with someone using this method, that 'lack of trust' and discomfort that manipura describes is the side effect, which I'm okay with in a world like Zalanthas where life is cheap, and friends are valuable.

QuoteOld school assassination is another one the romans liked.  And I would seriously like to see more of it. Titus Pullo did some hitman work in Rome and I keep wondering why that sort of thing rarely shows up in armageddon reletive to key-lock assassinations that every leader and their mother seems to prefer. (I mean I know the answer, it's hard. But backroom killings are easypeasylemonsqueezy.)

I think they exist...somewhat, but agree there should be more.  For the record, when this originally came up as a topic, I thought we were talking about breaking -in- to kill people in their own apartment, not inviting people to your own.  I'm still fine with the latter, but I think people should innately be paranoid enough about it that it's actually pretty hard to pull off, and if you get the opportunity, it's usually after a good amount of trust has been earned which makes it fit in with the 'betrayal' part of the game.  For the old school assassinations, the current function of crimcode means that it pretty much relies on someone willing to twink certain things out, or be familiar enough with functions of the crimcode to take the job.  This makes it far more comfortable for someone like me, who's lost dozens of characters to crimcode and figured things out, than a newer player who's just trying to get their feet wet in the criminal parts of the game.  I think it's okay, though, that assassinations are like car accidents; most of them occur a small radius from the home. :P

QuotePretty much. I've been killed by players in ways that I wouldn't even consider because of how lame it is. I've been meta'd by players I gave the benefit of the doubt to. And yes I consider it twinky hogshit.

Just a note, I think this is pretty much a rehash of the raider/raidee argument.  I fault no one in this game for not giving the benefit of the doubt after it's fucked them a few times, and that seems more in keeping with the lack of trust I'd see as rampant in Zalanthas.  Doing my whole veteran thing, I will say I think newer players have it harder because as a whole, the PC playerbase is much more averse to killing each other at this point than it used to be.  Raiding was common.  Rogue mages were more common.  Criminals fought soldiers openly in the streets after killing a PC in the streets.  So on and so forth.  We've developed as a community to be much more trusting of each other, which makes the guy who finally wants you dead, regardless of who it is, seem like an asshole when they rely on the code of the game to catch you rather than your good faith in letting it happen.  This makes it more difficult because it's become more 'standardized' to show a certain amount of trust in other players not wanting you dead.

QuoteWith that being said I've intentionally let people go with minor punishments or something similar knowing it might come back to haunt me one day because that can be fun.

It can be.  And sometimes, it really does fuck you.  I know I've been the guy who came back and fucked someone who let me off, and I've been the guy who got fucked because I let someone off.  I've also been the guy who -knew- something was off, but blamed it on paranoia...and it turns out I was actually right.

More than anything else, I think players as a whole are a little too quick to make mortal enemies out of minor infractions.  You can not like the guy and not want them dead...as long as you are okay with giving the benefit of the doubt that they aren't going to exaggerate the relationship and actively plot to kill you while you leave yourself defenseless.  Meanwhile, defending against it tends to escalate it, and so on and so forth.  Most minor infractions can very quickly build into mortal combat, which is just kind of how social roleplaying games where enemies are other players tend to be when death is permanent.

On the actual topic, I still dislike this idea in particular as a whole.  But I also think that there are lots of adjustments in the game to be made that would make changes to apartment code to get rid of this a lot more appealing, first and foremost a lot of the ideas that Reiloth suggested, and in the meantime, I'll continue to treat apartments as what they've been for a long time, which is both extremes of the scale: Ultimate safety, and ultimate danger.

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 03:35:53 PM
Now explain to me why the fuck I should continue in good faith? Give me a reason why I shouldn't be angry?

Because it's a game.  It's a game that plenty of us are passionate about and very invested in, yes...but in the end, it's a game.
Because when someone's knee-jerk response seems to be "This person is disagreeing with me so I lump them all into the category of They're Trying To Fuck Me" then what you're actually saying just gets lost.

For the record, I'm not saying you shouldn't be angry.  Hold on to whatever you want and dwell on whatever you want and be angry about it all you want.
It's just hard to listen to your arguments, even when there's a speck of validity to them, when they get lost in you vaguebooking again about some time that some player did you wrong and you just lump everyone into the category of 'Twink'.

We've all twink killed Jingo. It's a rite of passage.  Sorry, bro.  You play too many high karma undesireables!

Quote from: Majikal on August 28, 2016, 04:54:29 AM

Quote from: Armaddict on August 27, 2016, 11:09:39 PM
I don't think the timeless strategy of 'Trap them in a meeting place' is exactly meta, or something that needs to be removed from the game.

I agree with this.

Do I do it? No. I prefer to find more entertaining ways to murder mundanely, and plus.. who wants to clean up the body in your own crib? Go to their crib and you don't have to get out the bloodstains. Bonus points if you kill someone in the middle of the street, a feat I've pulled off only twice since the crim code changes way back when.

Expanding on my previous point, my biggest gripe is with the crim code, while it's improved a billion times over since the days of old the sheer number of soldiers and general safety of being in the public is overdone. Especially in the cases of characters that travel only from clan compound to the tavern and back. I would love for walking the street to be more dangerous, unfortunately any sort of public attack is near-impossible unless you are one code savvy son of a bitch. I wish the night-time crim code limitations were ALWAYS in effect.

The mindless npc's that are everywhere in nak make public violence nearly non existent. I don't care for yee old 'com meet me @ mi apartment/compound/office so I ken murdrr u therr' tactic, mostly because it's boring. However, I can see why it's the crutch of so many players because oftentimes there's not many other options or they simply like to win.

I think boiling it down to 'like to win' is a little over simplified. I do give the players the benefit of the doubt, and at the end of the day, the risk vs reward points most people towards Apartment Killings.

As Armaddict points out, those with the code savvy to pull off assassinations in broad daylight can and will do it. People who are experienced enough with how crime code works, and how some skills work, can pull off public violence with relative ease, once they have the skills required to do so.

However, what is missing from the puzzle are petty crimes, such as assault, muggings, and pickpocketings. Crimes of passion, or public displays of violence, such as a Bruce Wayne-esque mugging gone wrong, or murder in the street.

To me, it says that to perform such crime, you must be a very talented individual. This is sort of at odds with the general 'criminal element' of any city, where you have all walks of life. Many people who perform petty crime are drug addicts, or transients. It is rare (if ever) you will see crime performed by unskilled, but determined, criminals who hold you up with a knife or intimidation. It's simply too easy to ignore someone who isn't dangerous enough (in our meta, coded understanding of it) to actually harm you.

This is incongruous with our IC, RP understanding of the world. Of course, if a menacing person came at you with a knife, you wouldn't first size them up by the equipment they wear (Are they holding a serrated, rare dagger, or a simple, Labyrinth-make starter weapon?), if you've seen them before (which of course implies they've been around, and they might have the skills to back up their claim), and so on. I think often, myself included, we jump to OOC conclusions about our assailants before we reach IC ones, which can make the life of a petty criminal unrealistically difficult.

The ease a 'victim' can get away, as well, makes petty crime impossible as well. I've seen (and reported) people who've been hit with peraine daggers just stand up as the poison wears off and walk away, as if nothing had happened. I've also seen people getting raided just walk off, run away, not interact.

It's been mentioned before, but having movement delayed, or 'approach' code that doesn't allow someone to disengage except by force, would present an option for engagement. It wouldn't allow people to automatically run away. You would need to flee. This is at odds with what Armaddict mentioned earlier, that everyone should have the 'flee' skill. I disagree. I think it should be difficult for people to escape situations like these -- Which may increase the likelihood of their occurrence on a day to day basis.

I think it's silly that everyone needs to stock up with poisons, in order to incapacitate people so they don't automatically flee. Similarly, it would be a silly world if the Assasilant could always disable their victim with ease. A balance should be struck, but it's difficult to finger exactly what that balance should be. Should people who were recently in combat be able to immediately use the Way? Perhaps similar to the combat timer, their mind isn't calm enough to use it. Should people who were recently in combat be able to run a million rooms away without recourse? It seems we live in a world of extremes at the moment, so what is the middle way?

Quote from: manipura on August 30, 2016, 05:09:20 PM

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 03:35:53 PM
Now explain to me why the fuck I should continue in good faith? Give me a reason why I shouldn't be angry?

Because it's a game.  It's a game that plenty of us are passionate about and very invested in, yes...but in the end, it's a game.
Because when someone's knee-jerk response seems to be "This person is disagreeing with me so I lump them all into the category of They're Trying To Fuck Me" then what you're actually saying just gets lost.

I'm back on my meds again so I suppose I should try to rein it in a bit. As I get caught up emotionally sometimes when I'm on them.

But as far as lumping people into the twink catagory? I'll continue to do that. I honestly don't care. I wouldn't play the game in such a shitty way, so I don't see why I should indulge you.

QuoteFor the record, I'm not saying you shouldn't be angry.  Hold on to whatever you want and dwell on whatever you want and be angry about it all you want.
It's just hard to listen to your arguments, even when there's a speck of validity to them, when they get lost in you vaguebooking again about some time that some player did you wrong and you just lump everyone into the category of 'Twink'.

You're probably thinking I'm referring to one particular incident, I'm not. But even then, I can't be bothered to care when the defense of the behavior is pretty egregious at best.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 30, 2016, 05:25:09 PM
I think boiling it down to 'like to win' is a little over simplified. I do give the players the benefit of the doubt, and at the end of the day, the risk vs reward points most people towards Apartment Killings.

I think it can be described this way.

Some players are very rooted in the zero sum mentality of the game. In order for them to win, someone else has to lose. This conception lacks nuance, but conceptions of players who think like this also lack any meaningful nuance. To them it's just black and white. They can't see how playing out a rivalry might be rewarding. They can't understand the social and psychological repercussions of being a murderer. They don't understand how politics in Allanak could be ten times cooler if pc's weren't just knocked off the moment they step out of line. They just see Armageddon as a game to win.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 30, 2016, 04:28:11 PM
However -- For reasons stated by many -- The 'meta' aspect to me is that PCs of mine and probably of others wouldn't consider the Apartment to be the 'Death Trap' that it currently is. As a one-way exit, your PC doesn't necessarily know that apartment is impossible to get out of, do they?

I give the benefit of the doubt alll the time, mostly because I have an overabundance of trust in my fellow players (which fucks me over quite regularly). Also, when someone invites me to their apartment and I suspect a murder is afoot, I feel like a meta bastard if I tell them no. Especially after the twenty-ninth invitation, eventually I just say "Fuck it, whatever happens happens." *click*I once got to be murdered behind a curtain by two assassins, one of the assassins just spammed close curtain as though the curtain itself would hold me back, jokes on me.. it did and I died.

A less magickal crim-code that would promote action to happen all over would make for more interesting play, couple this with doors being able to lock/unlock from the inside without a key would also make things more exciting and realistic IMO. Can you imagine two nobles clashing to the point of nearly open war, then the nobles bump into eachother walking with opposing entourages on a nearly vacant street... such potential. Salarr and Kadius hunting branches talking that mad shit to each other while they walk down Commerce Way, only to end with spears and shit getting drawn? THIS is the kind of action I wish was possible.

Partisans of two rival Houses meet with hatred.

SCENE I. Verona. A public place.

TYBALT
What, art thou drawn among these heartless hinds?
Turn thee, Benvolio, look upon thy death.

BENVOLIO
I do but keep the peace: put up thy sword,
Or manage it to part these men with me.

TYBALT
What, drawn, and talk of peace! I hate the word,
As I hate hell, all Montagues, and thee:
Have at thee, coward!

They fight

Enter, several of both houses, who join the fray; then enter Citizens, with clubs


Much more fun for everyone than Tybalt trying to lure Benvolio to his locked apartment on Merchant's Road.

.

Pretty crime doesn't happen because nobody trusts another player to react appropriately to a mere "petty crime".

Quote from: Molten Heart on August 30, 2016, 05:35:08 PM
Petty crime doesn't happen because petty criminals are branded and ostracized when they are caught.

If they aren't simply murdered by the Goon Squad.

What I find unrealistic is that the Labyrinth is ALL CRIME, ALL THE TIME, and Southerners are seen as outsiders (even though it is assumed that spice addicts drift from Allanak to the Labyrinth, and would be full Allanaki, not 'born in the rinth, die in the rinth'). Meanwhile, Allanak is actually a police state, and committing crime is tantamount to falling on a sword.

Again, extremes. It'd be nice to see something in the Labyrinth that draws Allanakis (such as a Black Market, that does exist, but is quite deep within the Labyrinth and not encouraged to be used by Southerners), or for crime to be more in the hands of 'Apprentice/Journeyman' Criminals, rather than the court where only Master Criminals need apply. The melange, the blend, is what makes for excitement. If you avoid the Labyrinth entirely, 9/10 you won't see violence in the street. If you avoid Allanak, 9/10 you will see NPC corpses everywhere and bits of unwanted loot. Something in the middle would appeal to me.

Quote from: Majikal on August 30, 2016, 05:29:21 PM

Quote from: Reiloth on August 30, 2016, 04:28:11 PM
However -- For reasons stated by many -- The 'meta' aspect to me is that PCs of mine and probably of others wouldn't consider the Apartment to be the 'Death Trap' that it currently is. As a one-way exit, your PC doesn't necessarily know that apartment is impossible to get out of, do they?

I give the benefit of the doubt alll the time, mostly because I have an overabundance of trust in my fellow players (which fucks me over quite regularly). Also, when someone invites me to their apartment and I suspect a murder is afoot, I feel like a meta bastard if I tell them no. Especially after the twenty-ninth invitation, eventually I just say "Fuck it, whatever happens happens." *click*I once got to be murdered behind a curtain by two assassins, one of the assassins just spammed close curtain as though the curtain itself would hold me back, jokes on me.. it did and I died.

You could always "Forget" to sheath your weapon and shield after spar. God knows I've gone through enough social calls with a bloody bastard sword out accidentally that I could probably get away with always being armed on purpose. People always seem to missed the "armed" flag.

I am hesitant to the point of being scared of dipping my toe into this conversation. :-\

Some of ya'll play some truculent characters. I've scratched my head in desperate wonder at the fact that I have constantly tried to spare people and just asked them to "walk away" or "leave me alone" only to have them do something where I had to turn around and say, "Seriously?!" Or worse, "I see."

As far as locked apartments go... shiiiiit. I hate walking into them with people I don't trust. I start breathing hard and my heart races when I hear a door click and I go on high alert. But ICly, you roll with that and either come out of it or don't. I don't want them changed really just because someone has the POTENTIAL to fuck me over. Maybe I'll take better precautions next time. Maybe I'll trust my gut. Maybe I'll be stronger and faster than my assailant and be able to pluck that key dripping with blood from their corpse to get free. (shrugs) Or happily wander in like a lamb to the slaughter after a friend and get ganked. Or maybe I'll make an awesome friend by not panicking and doing the first thing I can think of that will screw someone. It's happened.

Soldiers... are we advocating in favor of less killing options or more here? I mean, make apartments less dangerous and the street more dangerous by taking away crim code and it's the same issue only the entire city becomes Thunderdome. Apartment murders will still happen. Maybe with more frequency. You'd just have to plan better to ensure your prey stays put and not run out the door.

Fewer HG soldiers in the streets, okay. I can see that.

Apartments.. we could make it so that in a 2 room apartment only the inner door locks someone in? Maybe that would be a good compromise.

There are all kinds of ways to end someone. Heh. You guys are awesome with coming up with ways to do it. I think how it gets done depends on the target. Joe Schmo is gonna get shanked in the street usually, but someone with even a touch more protection and influence, needs a more nuanced approach. Or a blunt force attack. And these things I have noticed take planning and care. More than some seem to realize or want to hear about because they were at the end of the knife. If a person wishes up before/during/after you attempt to end someone, the world does tend to react. Sometimes hilariously and sometimes teeth-grittingly (Oh, shit am I gonna be able to get out of this).

I'm gonna give people the benefit of the doubt that when they end me, it was for a reason and hope I get some kinda interaction before the beep if I can't prevent it. Err.. sorry if I rambled.

What I see a lot of in this thread is:

"If you have the code know how,"

or

"If you do X Y Z, which is a meta trick..."

I guess yes, we all do come up with our work arounds and ways to make it work. There's always ways to explain it, especially after the fact. Like i've said, I don't really blame people for using apartments in the way they do. But doesn't it all seem like a work around?

Apartment killings seem like a work around for our crime code, at the end of the day. It works, it gets the job done. Is that how we like it? No, but we're also a little afraid that if we change that prematurely (make it more difficult to kill people in apartments, without changing the crime code), that we'd lose one of our guaranteed ways to murder people.

It's a sticky pickle. Is that even a phrase?

Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 30, 2016, 05:47:54 PM
You could always "Forget" to sheath your weapon and shield after spar. God knows I've gone through enough social calls with a bloody bastard sword out accidentally that I could probably get away with always being armed on purpose. People always seem to missed the "armed" flag.

I suppose I should play the Trump Card and say I'm being sarcastic here. And after reading Iiyola's (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,29083.msg959510.html#msg959510) post about pyramid schemes, I want my next "invite to apartment for nefarious deed" plot to be getting people to sign up for my High Energy All Natural Grishen Berry Extract Marketing Plan.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 30, 2016, 05:52:53 PM
What I see a lot of in this thread is:

"If you have the code know how,"

or

"If you do X Y Z, which is a meta trick..."

I guess yes, we all do come up with our work arounds and ways to make it work. There's always ways to explain it, especially after the fact. Like i've said, I don't really blame people for using apartments in the way they do. But doesn't it all seem like a work around?

Apartment killings seem like a work around for our crime code, at the end of the day. It works, it gets the job done. Is that how we like it? No, but we're also a little afraid that if we change that prematurely (make it more difficult to kill people in apartments, without changing the crime code), that we'd lose one of our guaranteed ways to murder people.

Reiloth for staff 2016.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 30, 2016, 05:53:58 PM

Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 30, 2016, 05:47:54 PM
You could always "Forget" to sheath your weapon and shield after spar. God knows I've gone through enough social calls with a bloody bastard sword out accidentally that I could probably get away with always being armed on purpose. People always seem to missed the "armed" flag.

I suppose I should play the Trump Card and say I'm being sarcastic here. And after reading Iiyola's (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php?action=post;quote=959510;topic=29083.27100;num_replies=27124;sesc=2cb9a74f0aa05ddff77b0855915cef62) post about pyramid schemes, I want my next "invite to apartment for nefarious deed" plot to be getting people to sign up for my High Energy All Natural Grishen Berry Extract Marketing Plan.

Lol...

"Where do I sign? Wait a minute...I don't know how to read...AGLUUUUK!"

Quote from: Reiloth on August 30, 2016, 05:52:53 PM
It's a sticky pickle. Is that even a phrase?

I don't think so.
But it probably should be.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 30, 2016, 05:53:58 PM
I want my next "invite to apartment for nefarious deed" plot to be getting people to sign up for my High Energy All Natural Grishen Berry Extract Marketing Plan.

(almost spits out soda and laughs)

Quote from: Reiloth on August 30, 2016, 05:41:16 PM

Quote from: Molten Heart on August 30, 2016, 05:35:08 PM
Petty crime doesn't happen because petty criminals are branded and ostracized when they are caught.

If they aren't simply murdered by the Goon Squad.

What I find unrealistic is that the Labyrinth is ALL CRIME, ALL THE TIME, and Southerners are seen as outsiders (even though it is assumed that spice addicts drift from Allanak to the Labyrinth, and would be full Allanaki, not 'born in the rinth, die in the rinth'). Meanwhile, Allanak is actually a police state, and committing crime is tantamount to falling on a sword.

Again, extremes. It'd be nice to see something in the Labyrinth that draws Allanakis (such as a Black Market, that does exist, but is quite deep within the Labyrinth and not encouraged to be used by Southerners), or for crime to be more in the hands of 'Apprentice/Journeyman' Criminals, rather than the court where only Master Criminals need apply. The melange, the blend, is what makes for excitement. If you avoid the Labyrinth entirely, 9/10 you won't see violence in the street. If you avoid Allanak, 9/10 you will see NPC corpses everywhere and bits of unwanted loot. Something in the middle would appeal to me.

There's a huge misunderstanding as far as the labyrinth goes, which means maybe I missed a documentation change or something.  But labyrinth players tend to want to be separated from the city at large and turn it into an iso role, a lot of the time, which just doesn't make sense for what it is nor what it should be.  The labyrinth isn't avoided by soldiers because it's too dangerous; the Arm could literally come in and annex the alleys anytime they wanted to.  The thing is...they don't -want- to.  It's a part of the city that was poorly built, filled with undesirables, and not worth maintaining...so the undesirables took over.  Every time someone talks about starting a northside vs southside war, I roll my eyes.  Every time I hear an alley rat give another alley rat shit for having business in southside, I roll my eyes.

It's become a haven for criminals simply because soldiers stopped going there, not because it's a sponsored separatist state.  Templars keep their eyes on notables there, and always will.  Likewise, prominent northsiders maintain presence in the city proper...because that's where most of the business and power in the city actually is.  They just operate out of a location that's basically been abandoned by the state, and they are wary of attempts of the templarate to re-seize control of their alleys (which is responded to accordingly, not with threats of open violence, because that would be a dumb move, as has been demonstrated historically many many times).

Anyway.  The point was that the Black Market is actually encouraged to be used by southsiders, so long as they conform to the peace of the labyrinth (edit here because rereading made me laugh at this line: I mean as long as it's not an outsider coming in and killing their kids and families).  Someone fighting their way there is still a troublemaker who should have respected their alleys, or hired someone else to do it for them (a job that almost every elf will jump on, due to the opportunities provided by their services being needed).  Anyone playing that the eastside is closed to southsiders or westsiders is doing it -wrong- (and yes, I have documentation backing that up).  The only 'don't do that' for the elven community that runs the black market is causing trouble.  They are there for business. Anyway.  /rant.

Again, I agree that crimcode is the major source of this problem.  I'd much rather the NPC presence be greatly reduced to encourage a vacuum for criminals to operate in, and for PC soldiers to fill, than anything else.  Particularly closer to the alleys, crime should be far more commit-able on many levels.

As I said before, there was a time where fighting NPC soldiers was kind of a norm.  I haven't seen anyone actually do this in a long time, either when I was in a criminal group or against one.  It's like it became a taboo that wasn't allowed.  If anything, in the meantime of crimcode changes, this is one of the things that is entirely possible for players to commit to now.  Stop avoiding the violence out of fear it could go badly, and logically speaking, you will see an increase in street-violence.


edit:  Acknowledgement this is pretty off-topic, in so far as the apartments, but I think I agree that while they wouldn't go away, they'd become far less prevalent, and thus something that we could tweak around more, if we could get away with more crimes.  I'm okay with Allanak being a police state, and for soldiers being fully capable of jumping up to the 'death sentence for resisting arrest' territory, but I think their coverage could stand to be a lot less effective, and the ability of a group of people who don't care for soldiers to be capable of fighting off their oppressors...at least in the immediate time window.  Welcome back, PC soldier relevance, and welcome for the first time to true criminal viability without intricate code knowledge (though code knowledge will always be a good thing to have).

I don't think killing should be made easier as it should be made riskier.

I think the social risk of murders are always underplayed, staff just don't seem to be interested in adding the appropriate nuance when someone is killed. Aide get's murdered in the estate? You get a bloodstain. The servants who had to clean up the mess don't suffer from ptsd, arn't afraid they'll be next and certainly wouldn't develop subversive leanings to their murderous boss.

If there are any changes made to crimecode, I think there should be changes to psionics as well. It's easy to engineer a killing if you have a unencryptable psychic connection with your co conspirators. If that connection could be tapped, I think there would be a lot more risk.

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 06:15:16 PM
I don't think killing should be made easier as it should be made riskier.

I think the social risk of murders are always underplayed, staff just don't seem to be interested in adding the appropriate nuance when someone is killed. Aide get's murdered in the estate? You get a bloodstain. The servants who had to clean up the mess don't suffer from ptsd, arn't afraid they'll be next and certainly wouldn't develop subversive leanings to their murderous boss.

If there are any changes made to crimecode, I think there should be changes to psionics as well. It's easy to engineer a killing if you have a unencryptable psychic connection with your co conspirators. If that connection could be tapped, I think there would be a lot more risk.

I don't think there's a reason to put this on Staff. If anything, we have a duty as players to give each other the benefit of a good death.

Subversive leanings toward the boss -if- it is viewed that the boss did the wrong thing? That's happened.

I don't know that it would be entirely possible save to make it even more difficult for a role to do their job (ie: the NPCs stop listening to you, which wouldn't really happen if you are the boss and in a more powerful social position than them). Social risk is mostly on us to play out and enforce and while an occasional animation to back that up is welcome, standing forth and impressing our will on the game world/society/people's minds is RP.

It's my personal opinion, but let's not have psionics messed with too much. I played a game where people spied on EVERY.THING.YOU.DID.OR.SAID. It is MADDENING. Let me at least have the inside of my character's skull to SOME degree. I'll RP out things for mindworms and do stuff to make myself vulnerable, but there has to be some line. As it is, keeping secrets is hard enough. Not the least of which is because people want to be included in plots and secrets and feel offended and excluded if you don't share (I am talking IG here), but then turn RIGHT around and prove you were right to not wreck what you were working hard and building toward by including them. As if they wanted to be included JUST to screw you and on some levels, I can't understand it.

Another game I played, I used to be an open book with info (it wasn't disallowed). We all shared and collaborated and helped each other figure out stuff. I've gotten.. more paranoid playing here. If psionics get altered to that degree, I want to be able to have the ability to parry or block it. I give a crud about detecting who it is, just so long as I can give them a mental slap back. Otherwise, lemme just stand out on a corner and shout my plots to the world.

(edit: to tweak some of my wording so it's not giving anything away)

Quote from: Reiloth on August 30, 2016, 06:38:29 PM

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 06:15:16 PM
I don't think killing should be made easier as it should be made riskier.

I think the social risk of murders are always underplayed, staff just don't seem to be interested in adding the appropriate nuance when someone is killed. Aide get's murdered in the estate? You get a bloodstain. The servants who had to clean up the mess don't suffer from ptsd, arn't afraid they'll be next and certainly wouldn't develop subversive leanings to their murderous boss.

If there are any changes made to crimecode, I think there should be changes to psionics as well. It's easy to engineer a killing if you have a unencryptable psychic connection with your co conspirators. If that connection could be tapped, I think there would be a lot more risk.

I don't think there's a reason to put this on Staff. If anything, we have a duty as players to give each other the benefit of a good death.

Players are people, and people are shit. If you don't punish a self-serving behavior people will repeat that behavior. Killing people in apartments to remove all potential threat to your PC is a self-serving behavior with no negative repercussions (unless the murdered has a powerful PC friend). So it happens.

We do rely on staff to animate the virtual world, including its reactions to our PCs. Jingo is arguing that Staff/the World  is not reacting enough to certain behavior.

QuoteWe do rely on staff to animate the virtual world, including its reactions to our PCs. Jingo is arguing that Staff is not reacting enough to certain behavior.

Implicit in that position is the sentiment that how you would animate the virtual world is the way it should be done, however.

Well duh.

I'm not a personal believer in the notion that players should be able to do what they want so long as the code allows for it, Virtual world (and the reactions that should "realistically" come from it) be damned. I know Reiloth wants us to be better and more courteous Roleplayers, but believing Staff shouldn't guide player behavior simply leads to extreme, self-interested, and "zero-sum" player behavior.

Indeed.  Just saying, because the common inference made with that sentiment is that the npc's should be reinforcing just behavior or something that we take for granted as common sense in the real world, which is just not the case of the Zalanthan world in many scenarios.

Mm, and is being able to turn your rickety apartment in to a sound- and smell-proof death chamber that also disposes of the body with zero trace and zero questions asked by anyone in the Virtual, NPC, or PC world one of those scenarios?

We can treat the game world like a cartoon where the above is true, but I don't think that makes for a funner or more immersive game. It's why I've largely checked out of the PVP element of the game; the unrealism of crimcode and how PVP is done are just too annoying to see in practice.

Or we can agree that in a place where bodies are routinely moved through the city to a corpse pile, where bodies sit in the street for days, where death is common and prevalent, and where the corruption is real...a lot of cases, people just don't really care that another commoner may or may not have been stabbed.

Sure.  Sometimes people get interested, in which case there are avenues for investigations to take place (done it).  But insisting that every case gets its own personal detective interrogating all of the possible witnesses is pretty overboard.

Edit:  You seem to be...kind of reinforcing what I meant.  Trying to make the virtual world care about everyone's PC that dies is really not something that has ever really fit with the environment or documentation as far as how the world treats death.  Now if it's the death of a PC that is important to someone, it seems likely that a templar investigating would get some answers to go off of.  But I doubt anyone would come running to point fingers and yell about something that might be shady, risking themselves becoming a person exposed to the corruption of it, for what is essentially a stranger.

It'd be more than we have now, where the beep doesn't travel through walls and you just need to wait for decay code. I wouldn't be opposed to bodies only decaying in certain rooms, just so players would actually have to drag them out and maybe answer awkward questions.

That said, apartment kills are really just a symptom of players not knowing how to resolve a rivalry beyond "murder." Doubleedit: Or, as Large Hero points out, other murder venues being very restricted.

Quote from: Armaddict on August 30, 2016, 07:29:05 PM
Or we can agree that in a place where bodies are routinely moved through the city to a corpse pile, where bodies sit in the street for days, where death is common and prevalent, and where the corruption is real...a lot of cases, people just don't really care that another commoner may or may not have been stabbed.

Unless it happens in the street, in which case perfectly loyal killing machines will instantly murder you. Because death is common and prevalent, and people just don't care.

So no, we can't agree.

Quote from: Large Hero on August 30, 2016, 07:32:51 PM

Quote from: Armaddict on August 30, 2016, 07:29:05 PM
Or we can agree that in a place where bodies are routinely moved through the city to a corpse pile, where bodies sit in the street for days, where death is common and prevalent, and where the corruption is real...a lot of cases, people just don't really care that another commoner may or may not have been stabbed.

Unless it happens in the street, in which case perfectly loyal killing machines will instantly murder you. Because death is common and prevalent, and people just don't care.

So no, we can't agree.

This is pretty different.  A soldier who stands and watches something is a big difference than some commoner running up to them in the street and pointing a finger and saying something might be going on.  There's a reason that even crimes in the open street sometimes don't crimflag.  There's a reason that crimflags seem only certain in the same room as a soldier. That reason is that this is not the NYPD with investigative detectives assigned case numbers.  This is a place where people -are- dying commonly, and bodies -are- being dragged in the open street.  It's crimes in progress that seem to warrant immediate attention.  That's in keeping with the whole thing, unless the person is someone who gains more interest.

Now if someone does it in their own apartment, then just leaves the body there to decay, I agree, that's pretty weird.  But I haven't had my death in someone else's place in a long time...I've killed people in their own, however, after breaking in, in which case I find the leaving of the body perfectly fine.

QuoteThat said, apartment kills are really just a symptom of players not knowing how to resolve a rivalry beyond "murder."

They're a symptom of what's been talked about for the majority of the thread.  My disagreement about the virtual world doesn't change anything of what's been said.  I just think the average zalanthan, as is demonstrated through both code and documentation, doesn't actually care enough to make sure a killer 'gets it' unless it's actually affecting them, or they are actively interested in aiding the Arm (which is possible, but also just as possible for the inverse).

Quote from: Armaddict on August 30, 2016, 07:38:23 PM

Quote from: Large Hero on August 30, 2016, 07:32:51 PM

Quote from: Armaddict on August 30, 2016, 07:29:05 PM
Or we can agree that in a place where bodies are routinely moved through the city to a corpse pile, where bodies sit in the street for days, where death is common and prevalent, and where the corruption is real...a lot of cases, people just don't really care that another commoner may or may not have been stabbed.

Unless it happens in the street, in which case perfectly loyal killing machines will instantly murder you. Because death is common and prevalent, and people just don't care.

So no, we can't agree.

This is pretty different.  A soldier who stands and watches something is a big difference than some commoner running up to them in the street and pointing a finger and saying something might be going on.  There's a reason that even crimes in the open street sometimes don't crimflag.  There's a reason that crimflags seem only certain in the same room as a soldier. That reason is that this is not the NYPD with investigative detectives assigned case numbers.  This is a place where people -are- dying commonly, and bodies -are- being dragged in the open street.  It's crimes in progress that seem to warrant immediate attention.  That's in keeping with the whole thing, unless the person is someone who gains more interest.

Now if someone does it in their own apartment, then just leaves the body there to decay, I agree, that's pretty weird.  But I haven't had my death in someone else's place in a long time...I've killed people in their own, however, after breaking in, in which case I find the leaving of the body perfectly fine.

QuoteThat said, apartment kills are really just a symptom of players not knowing how to resolve a rivalry beyond "murder."

They're a symptom of what's been talked about for the majority of the thread.  My disagreement about the virtual world doesn't change anything of what's been said.  I just think the average zalanthan, as is demonstrated through both code and documentation, doesn't actually care enough to make sure a killer 'gets it' unless it's actually affecting them, or they are actively interested in aiding the Arm (which is possible, but also just as possible for the inverse).

Zalanthans might not run to the law if they know Amos the Amputater is shacking up down the hall. But they should still know they're sharing an apartment block with a psycho just so they can watch their own back. Murders, especially frequent murders, should be grounds for rumors and capable of being followed up on. Currently you can kill as many people in your apartment/estate/tent as you want and never develop a reputation or suffer negative reprecussions (friends and relatives seeking revenge, employees being scared off cause you're a murderous jackass, etc.).

Mixed feelings on this: Killing someone in your own apartment.  Should probably have some consequences. And its kinda lame that you are practically dragging a body out, covered the floor with blood and no one is noticing. This is something that goes on and the staff has doesn't seem to have a problem with.  That said, killing someone in someone else's apartment...I see no problems with this...

As for locked rooms, basically what people are asking for is that you shoud be able to lock/unlock it with a key but anyone should be able to open the inside from the inside. This idea has been discussed before. I think this will lead to more crimes, which is a good thing. The only thing keeping people out of rooms is the fact you might log out, trapping them inside the room. The problem is this is too big of a buff to sneak/hide, and nerf to skill of picking locks.  Unless of course, you make it impossible to shadow people into their apartments which in turn might make apartments feel too safe.  

As much as I like many of the crim-code ideas, the idea of people fighting openly in public, and killing each other before soldiers come stop them, I still think many of the problems we have in the game are linked to how powerful 'look' and 'flee' is in the game. This is what has been creating this 'meta' where people feel the need to end things without chance of failure.

We talked about mdesc hiding gear/skill before but wonder if it would be better if it were tied to a skill like backstab instead. Its been mentioned before but imagine backstab changed so it caused less damage,but giving it the utility of hiding mdesc for about 15 seconds after backstabbing someone, with the lag delay of using the skill decreasing based on mastery. This wouldn't result in more successful kills, but more people would attempt it in public places which will generate more RP.    

On phone so not quoting. Armaddict:

Go attack someone in the city at daytime. You'll be instantly crimcoded, either by bystanders reporting it or vnpc soldiers reporting it.

Regardless of what you want to believe about harshness of the setting, the reality is this: the powers that be have created a society where even the smallest amount of unsanctioned violence creates an immediate and extreme response.

The people of the city may not care about violence and murder on a moral level.

They still care greatly about it, and likely think about the possibility constantly. Why not? If a soldier sees someone fighting me in the street, they're going to instantly intervene without asking questions. This may not go well for me.

What happens in places like North Korea, where government intervention is mercurial and brutal? People are extremely concerned with what their neighbors are up to, and they readily report it to the state.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 30, 2016, 06:38:29 PM

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 06:15:16 PM
I don't think killing should be made easier as it should be made riskier.

I think the social risk of murders are always underplayed, staff just don't seem to be interested in adding the appropriate nuance when someone is killed. Aide get's murdered in the estate? You get a bloodstain. The servants who had to clean up the mess don't suffer from ptsd, arn't afraid they'll be next and certainly wouldn't develop subversive leanings to their murderous boss.

If there are any changes made to crimecode, I think there should be changes to psionics as well. It's easy to engineer a killing if you have a unencryptable psychic connection with your co conspirators. If that connection could be tapped, I think there would be a lot more risk.

I don't think there's a reason to put this on Staff. If anything, we have a duty as players to give each other the benefit of a good death.

Yeah. I'm just talking about the risk that isn't represented in the game.

I like the idea of having bodies not auto-decompose in many kinds of rooms, including apartments.  

I'd be fine if they transformed, however.  Like from "the body of the lean, irritating man" into "the humanoid-shaped festering pile of bones and meat-mush," for example.  And have that pile create a disease-miasma in area.

I'm with Jingo. It's lame if you intentionally lead someone to and then use the OOC lack of risk of an apartment's locked door to secure a kill. I would love if apartments could be unlocked from the inside like how locks in real life are.

I also think flee is too powerful, crim-code is too strong and back-stab is too weak. Those things don't suddenly stop leading someone to your apartment and locking the door on them to kill them being a lame, gamey, method.

I've never been killed in an apartment behind a locked door. In fact the one time someone led me to a place and locked the door, they left a backdoor escape for me, and that was awesome and exhilarating. So if you're going to lock the door, leave them a balcony to leap off of or something. I think it's silly that people have an OOC aversion to going into apartments for exactly this reason. Apartments should have all sorts of windows for escape, but they tend to be impenetrable fortresses because of peoples OOC hate for having their knickers stolen... Which a locked door doesn't even keep from happening.

Realistically an apartment without windows would be a fucking swampy heatstroke waiting to happen.

This has been a great thread, very informative, and quite illuminating as to how other players view/experience murder, death, crimcode, etc.

On topic: Please, let me unlock a door from the inside without a key somehow, not always, maybe even better apartments, so Aides are more trustworthy to have social gatherings, then that rinthi with the 250 shithole on Miner's. I don't care if I have to pull a torch sconce to open the door, or some cryptic shit like that, let us have nice things! Lol, a bit over the top, but yeah, it'd open up more RP avenues, like card games, parties, delirious orgies and all that jazz.

There shouldn't be guards in the worst of the worst apartments, I don't think. I mean, yes, there should, but they should be guarding the person with the coin, not these shitholes people die in every day. And if it's a slightly better shithole, add the script where if you try to sneak past them, and they catch you, BUT you have more than 20 sid in your inventory, you've just bribed them to get past. (And of course that asshole would remember you. You were the highlight of his day, so if you're sneaking past via bribe, please don't make his job harder but taking EVERYTHING and giving the Templar a reason to come talk to him. He never liked you, he was just pretending to be your sid-buddy.)

Also, give me a couple windows to flee out of, with some pretty bad fall damage for even attempting to be so reckless when fleeing my suddenly murderous mate here. And windows for those spider-neckers to climb into. Fuck your locked door, you're NEVER safe, mudsexers.

emote cleans his jazz hands off.

Off topic/derail: So, maybe crimcode is binary, and that's not perfect, no. Either an NPC is there, or VNPCs are there, on that public road. Either night time crim code is effect, or daytime crim code is effect, okay, this makes code knowledge more handy in killing people, sometimes. I admit, I agree that it should be tweaked, but I'm not sure how. In the last few years, I've started wishing up even whenever I just consider killing someone (oocly consider it, not ICly, because my PC's are fuckwads who constantly consider murder an option, like I do IRL), and that hasn't been that often. I'm not wishing up just because docs suggest it, I'm doing it because, if I want to bribe the four HG soldiers down the road, so I can kill this half-breed scumbag, they'll be there to provide something more than binary crimcode, and sometimes I like to tinker with the idea of 'give squat.bottle friend' 4x, then 'ep torch; throw torch friend', and I think I'd need staff help to /really/ pull that one off.

This is how I plan to get around binary crimcode, extremely severe punishments, considering I don't have a lot of knowledge about the code. Even if I did, I'd probably still do this. (if staff's not around, doesn't respond, 50/50 chance I might still gank that breed)

Apartment killings. How is this easier? Maybe it's easier for people who think, hey, I -can- defeat this person, if I have the advantage of them running away. But I've known people who carry poisoned blades, and a few for different scenarios, or have turned out to be fucking mindworms/gickers/sorcs/ or just plain badass swordsman. I'm never -that- sure I can get away with murder.

I guess it is a little bit twinkish to kill people in an apartment, but, so are real life murders. Let me buy a gun, stalk this person, drug them while RP'ing being their friend after getting them into my house, then gunmurder their face, and put the body in my trunk (only at night, so VNPCS don't see) then put their body in a swamp so the raptors, err, alligators, can eat their corpse. Woohoo! PK successful. We stack the odds anytime we can. Perhaps warriors are supposed to have honor, but I don't think humans do. Or elves, stumps, breeds, maybe HGs, certainly not muls. Path of least resistance I think Bad Skeelz said, and it's true.

If we're wanting to change how apartment murders work in game, we need just one darn PC soldier to spread the rumors, 'Report a body, get 50 sid!' and the VNPC will rat your ass out so fucking quickly. (also, if you didn't notify staff that you're murdering someone, before or after, you might only get a binary response from the virtual world) Another method of changing how apartment murders work would be to change decay code, and I like that idea, mostly because I want to others (myself included, but much, much less so) to be forced to get diseases from eating/sleeping/sitting next to that decomposing body sitting over there. Maybe it could make everything in your apartment have that gith smell tag 'A horrible, pungent odor'. That'd stop a lot of damned apartment murders right there. No more fancy, pretty Aides murdering people in their silks, then letting the corpse rot in the corner. (if this is what's happening at all. I have no idea what you people do with my corpse after you apartment murder me. Have sex on it, maybe? Freaks.)

If we're wanting to improve the ways of killing people outside of apartments, and make that happen more frequently, perhaps more fun, or change the risks up a bit, my suggestion is, of course, less HG soldiers. Actually, no, less predictable HG soldiers. Give regular soldiers common sense, and make this be the dice roll for HG soldier response:

20% tries to kill attacker.
10% tries to kill victim.
10% tries to kill everyone involved. (boost this percentage if 'elf' keyword is in the room)
20% stands there and watches, inciting other soldiers to 'see what happens next, just in case'.
30% sap everyone. (this would necessitate HG soldiers getting bludgeoning weapons, of course)
10% carries on about his day. 'Templar said for me to make a loop around Gaj, not beat up littles anymore.'

Fun for the whole family, breeds included! That's more than a 60% chance you won't get insta-killed by HG's while being a filthy criminal, or a splendid assassin.

Would ^ this be better? I'd like to think so, but there are certainly other holes we could fill. (please help me fill holes. This is how I pass the time.) So, what about Dresan's backstab mdesc hiding idea? I think 'backstab face' should be an option, where you try to stab them in the eyes, but then again, I'm the asshole who thinks putting a 'smelly' tag on your knife should auto poison it with the plague, or Raza Raza worms, stuff like that. I like both ideas. Bully for you, Dresan. Bully for me.

I'm out of steam/vodka.

Somebody finish my thought.

Mmm, I think we're kind of going to extremes here in order to make arguments seem more viable, where the reality of the game is very likely somewhere in the middle.  I had a nice long post typed up, but in the interest of realization that this is going to be a very cyclical back and forth, I'll just say:

I think this has very quickly devolved into arguing what is essentially interpretation of what the VNPC world would do, which was the point of what I said in the first place.  Implicit arguments about -knowing- how vnpcs would behave is stepping into territory that is hopelessly mired and even with argument, it's still going to result in 'You're wrong' from some camp or another.

But I will say that in the single-case instance, I think it's pretty damn possible that you'd get away with it.  If it becomes a pattern of behavior, or it's a situation where staff thinks you ignored things, they (the staff) do a pretty good job of making sure the information gets disseminated to those who would know or care, and that's been demonstrated pretty consistently over a long period of time.

My opinion will stick with what's been described through various posts and analysis of documentation throughout my time here, until I see something truly definitive that sets things the other way.  I'm not overly attached to apartment killings; as I said, the ones I've done have been me breaking into theirs, not bringing them to mine.  But when we start arguing over how vnpcs should behave in reaction to PC behavior, I pretty much fall back on the reason that I don't include vnpcs in my emotes in any meaningful way, and that is because it's kind of overstepping my bounds.

QuoteRealistically an apartment without windows would be a fucking swampy heatstroke waiting to happen.

Also, RGS, I agree with -most- counts.  With brief research, it seems that inside-unlockable locks have been a thing since BC times, but that they were generally very insecure from the outside as well until the 17th century or so (where they returned to locking from both sides until the deadbolt).  But the lack of other entrances to apartments has been done to death in regards to explaining why burglars were kind of jipped in terms of methods of doing their job, and being entirely dependent on pick.

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 12:44:30 PM
Gotta win gotta win gotta win.

It is so disappointing players think this is a cool thing to do. I'd rather just twink my characters and play armageddon like the shitty pvp game it is.

I've played for almost 20 years.

The number of PC's I've killed is probably below 20 in total if you don't count people who attacked me first and forced my hand. Even then it's probably below 30. The majority of "my kills" happened on PC's I was playing who were assassins hired by other people to do it. I might argue those aren't actually "my kills" as they were the product of someone else's decisions and I was just the knife, so to speak. I didn't decide they should die, I just did the cutting, so, I might not even count those as mine. The number of PC's I've actually decided to kill and HAD KILLED/DID KILL in almost 20 years of play is probably around 10 - 15....MAYBE.

The issue here isn't that I'm trying to win win win.

The issue really is that you are very bad at losing I think.

Maybe you get killed a lot more than I do in really twinky ways very regularly which is why this is such a sore point for you?

For example, I can't recall a single time I've ever been killed in an apartment, ever.

The only advice I can give you is maybe to just play the game a bit smarter as this doesn't appear to be an issue for me but seems to be one that plagues you?

In fact the only arguably "twinky death" I can really recall suffering was at the hands of a Whiran involving a spell staff removed from the entire game shortly after which gives credence to the idea it was in fact a pretty twinky death and not just me being unreasonably butthurt. By that logic I don't feel me calling it twinky is out of bounds.

I'm just not sure what to tell you other than maybe you need a break?



As for the main topic, I have always been a supporter of the idea of being able to bash down an apartment door with this being easier to do potentially from the inside. (Doing it from the outside would get your crim-coded every time due to the level of "noise" it would cause and it would be much more difficult.)

Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 30, 2016, 03:28:15 PM

The frustration comes from the play-to-survive-at-all-costs mentality. Getting someone in a locked room is hands down the easiest and safest way to kill them. Personally I wish we had less crimcode so people could be ambushed more effectively in the streets.

I like this as well.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 30, 2016, 03:28:15 PM

I also have to disagree on whether apartment-killing is realistic. Roman Senators didn't invite each other over for dinner to murder one another. You'd either see someone judicially murdered (tried in a kangaroo court) and/or politically out-maneuvered so that suicide was the only way to spare one's family or dignity, etc. Think more Tuluk than Allanak.

Inviting people in to your home and then murdering them tends to carry severe social and political repercussions across all societies. I'm more familiar with the concept of "Guest right" from a Medieval concept, but even in antiquity killing your guest was considered extremely poor form. It's tantamount to betrayal, and few people would trust a known betrayer. Julius Caesar executed at least a few people who had betrayed and killed enemies of Caesar as rewarding them would set a bad precedent. In Zalanthas, people who have a habit of giving guests a one-way ticket to their apartments or estates should quickly become known for it.

All that said, my personal historical favorite means of settling political disputes was rousing a mob and heaving the offending party torn apart in the streets. Which happens to feed back in to my desire for less crimcode

Replace "Roman Senator" with "Mafia Henchman" or whatever theoretical role you feel might be supported via history.

As it stands, people IRL kill people in apartments all of the time NOW. Happens every single day. Now, take what happens every single day now and put it into a setting where the law is incredibly corrupt, there are no forensics, and bodies line the streets already from death via thirst/starvation/wanton murder and theft.

I don't think it's unreasonable in Zalanthas, or unrealistic by that logic. It's certainly not unreasonable NOW, since it happens IRL NOW, ALL OF THE TIME. It would be infinitely easier to get away with in Zalanthas so I don't see how someone could think it wouldn't be a fairly common occurrence since it is already a RL common occurrence.

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 08:58:39 AM

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 12:44:30 PM
Gotta win gotta win gotta win.

It is so disappointing players think this is a cool thing to do. I'd rather just twink my characters and play armageddon like the shitty pvp game it is.

I've played for almost 20 years.

The number of PC's I've killed is probably below 20 in total if you don't count people who attacked me first and forced my hand. Even then it's probably below 30. The majority of "my kills" happened on PC's I was playing who were assassins hired by other people to do it. I might argue those aren't actually "my kills" as they were the product of someone else's decisions and I was just the knife, so to speak. I didn't decide they should die, I just did the cutting, so, I might not even count those as mine. The number of PC's I've actually decided to kill and HAD KILLED/DID KILL in almost 20 years of play is probably around 10 - 15....MAYBE.

The issue here isn't that I'm trying to win win win.

The issue really is that you are very bad at losing I think.

Maybe you get killed a lot more than I do in really twinky ways very regularly which is why this is such a sore point for you?

For example, I can't recall a single time I've ever been killed in an apartment, ever.

The only advice I can give you is maybe to just play the game a bit smarter as this doesn't appear to be an issue for me but seems to be one that plagues you?

In fact the only arguably "twinky death" I can really recall suffering was at the hands of a Whiran involving a spell staff removed from the entire game shortly after which gives credence to the idea it was in fact a pretty twinky death and not just me being unreasonably butthurt. By that logic I don't feel me calling it twinky is out of bounds.

I'm just not sure what to tell you other than maybe you need a break?



As for the main topic, I have always been a supporter of the idea of being able to bash down an apartment door with this being easier to do potentially from the inside. (Doing it from the outside would get your crim-coded every time due to the level of "noise" it would cause and it would be much more difficult.)

Stop trying to make it personal. That's a silly argument. As I said, I've never been killed in an apartment. Yet still, I think purposefully leading someone to an apartment so you can lock them in and know they can't escape... Is a real lame way to play a roleplaying game. It's making considerations from a code standpoint instead of a roleplaying one. There's a number of reasons why apartments as they function are unrealistic as shit, and people abusing that unrealistic nature is sad. Just because apartments codedly work like a jail-cell doesn't mean they should be treated that way by role-players.

In a way, locked apartments make up for the fact that our characters rarely have to sleep.

Regardless, they're not unrealistic enough that I'd want to focus on this issue as a priority for resolution.

More windows would be fun, I guess - but it's a trade off. More avenues for escape means more avenues for intrusion.

I'm okay with that, personally. But it might get a little ridiculous for you burglar-hating folks.

Also, as much as it might feel meta, with locked apartments, its the way the game is, currently.

I could sneak up on you. I could bury my half-sword into your chest when you weren't paying attention... and you can stand up and flee to safety at a speed equal to or possibly greater than mine.

Zalanthan hardiness aside, a two-handed sword, in surprise, against an unarmed opponent who can just flee and run off feels a bit out of sorts, too. Just lock the damn door. Make them sorry for landing themselves in the position where DEATH was the only option.

I seem to be stalking Delirium. Hi Delirium!

I don't come down on either side of this issue. Frankly, I could give a shit. (My general approach here is, "Oh, this thread again. Yaaay.") But generally I like you guys, so I thought I'd point something out.

Stop using the realism argument. Apartment killings are perfectly realistic. That is, they map pretty damned well onto real life. Conversely, stop feeling like it's metagaming when you or someone else doesn't want to set foot in an apartment because they might get killed. That's also perfectly realistic.

I've been in Durban. I've been in Harare. I've been in Monrovia. These are all low-trust places, much like the common streets of Allanak. In none of those cities would I willingly set foot in a place where I'd be alone with someone I didn't know very well - i.e. one of the people I brought with me or someone I'd spent years cultivating a personal relationship with, unless that person had a very clear vested interest in wishing me well. That goes double, triple, quadruple, for a place I'd be alone and locked in.

Your baseline intuition that apartments should be safe is wrong. It's built in a high-trust society, which Allanak isn't. Avoiding spaces you can't get out of isn't meta, or unrealistic, or cheesy, or twinky. It's the normal, sane reaction of a person who wants to continue living.

Disclaimers:

Does this mean I support keeping the crimcode, or apartments, or the vNPC reactions, or whatever else in-game as they are? No. Does this mean I support changing them? No. Like I said, I don't care. I'm not on either side of this argument, for which there are good points based on what we want to experience in the game, self-consistency, and the like. Realism just isn't one of them.

Cool. Thanks for your non opinion.

Just out of curiosity, are these places you've been to just as dangerous on the street as in a closed off apartment?

I don't think you read the thread closely enough -- people have pretty much concluded (with some outlier disagreement) that apartments shouldn't be changed. It's that crime code and in particular how binary it is disallows other realistic options as well. Expanding these options would lead to more realistic crime outside of apartment slayings.

I don't think people need to "stop" having their opinions, just as you are entitled to have both opinions/no opinion.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 10:31:26 AM
Just out of curiosity, are these places you've been to just as dangerous on the street as in a closed off apartment?

No, they're not, generally speaking. Of course it depends on where you are, who you're with, etc. etc. etc. But there are a lot of folks who would take the opportunity of leading you down an alley/to a whorehouse/somewhere semi-private as an opportunity for mischief when they're perfectly "friendly" in public.

And yes, that's doing some violence to the truth, because we're not considering things like gangs, territories, loose tribal affiliations, boroughs, etc.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 10:31:26 AM
I don't think people need to "stop" having their opinions, just as you are entitled to have both opinions/no opinion.

OK, cool. Let me rephrase it: when you (general you, not you Reiloth) voice the opinion that people not wanting to go into apartments strikes you as 'meta' or 'unrealistic' or whatever, it strikes me that you have very little experience with real-life analogues.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on August 31, 2016, 09:46:31 AM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 08:58:39 AM

Quote from: Jingo on August 30, 2016, 12:44:30 PM
Gotta win gotta win gotta win.

It is so disappointing players think this is a cool thing to do. I'd rather just twink my characters and play armageddon like the shitty pvp game it is.

I've played for almost 20 years.

The number of PC's I've killed is probably below 20 in total if you don't count people who attacked me first and forced my hand. Even then it's probably below 30. The majority of "my kills" happened on PC's I was playing who were assassins hired by other people to do it. I might argue those aren't actually "my kills" as they were the product of someone else's decisions and I was just the knife, so to speak. I didn't decide they should die, I just did the cutting, so, I might not even count those as mine. The number of PC's I've actually decided to kill and HAD KILLED/DID KILL in almost 20 years of play is probably around 10 - 15....MAYBE.

The issue here isn't that I'm trying to win win win.

The issue really is that you are very bad at losing I think.

Maybe you get killed a lot more than I do in really twinky ways very regularly which is why this is such a sore point for you?

For example, I can't recall a single time I've ever been killed in an apartment, ever.

The only advice I can give you is maybe to just play the game a bit smarter as this doesn't appear to be an issue for me but seems to be one that plagues you?

In fact the only arguably "twinky death" I can really recall suffering was at the hands of a Whiran involving a spell staff removed from the entire game shortly after which gives credence to the idea it was in fact a pretty twinky death and not just me being unreasonably butthurt. By that logic I don't feel me calling it twinky is out of bounds.

I'm just not sure what to tell you other than maybe you need a break?



As for the main topic, I have always been a supporter of the idea of being able to bash down an apartment door with this being easier to do potentially from the inside. (Doing it from the outside would get your crim-coded every time due to the level of "noise" it would cause and it would be much more difficult.)

Stop trying to make it personal. That's a silly argument. As I said, I've never been killed in an apartment. Yet still, I think purposefully leading someone to an apartment so you can lock them in and know they can't escape... Is a real lame way to play a roleplaying game. It's making considerations from a code standpoint instead of a roleplaying one. There's a number of reasons why apartments as they function are unrealistic as shit, and people abusing that unrealistic nature is sad. Just because apartments codedly work like a jail-cell doesn't mean they should be treated that way by role-players.

If I wanted to murder someone IRL I would lead them into a room with no exits with a door that locked if possible, especially if I didn't have to worry about any modern RL forensics after the fact.

I don't see the issue.

Quote from: Tisiphone on August 31, 2016, 10:20:21 AM

Stop using the realism argument. Apartment killings are perfectly realistic. That is, they map pretty damned well onto real life. Conversely, stop feeling like it's metagaming when you or someone else doesn't want to set foot in an apartment because they might get killed. That's also perfectly realistic.

This.

If I don't trust you IRL I'm not going to follow you into a well lit alley much less a private room somewhere that you have a key to and I don't. I don't care if that room has fifteen windows I could in theory jump out of. I'm not going to do it.

For that matter if I don't trust you I'm not going to follow you anywhere.

If someone tricks you into following them in-game to a room they have a key to and you do not and kills you, well, they didn't twink you, they just outsmarted you, which hurts, but is the truth.

Well, i've been to <insert RL city here>, too!

I've been mugged several times in Los Angeles, and once in New York City. The one in NYC was actually in daytime (4PM roughly) and in a relatively busy street. When someone points a gun at you, you do what they say typically.

The times I was mugged in Los Angeles varied -- Mostly at night, and I was stupidly turned a corner in Downtown or another neighborhood where I probably shouldn't have been.

I don't think anyone disagrees that an Apartment slaying is legit (or if they do, they are as you say butthurt about an apartment slaying of one of their PCs). I've been killed in apartments and killed people in apartments. I think what we (the common we, generalizing here) are saying is that it is the lowest risk option, which is why it is utilized so frequently.

I agree that if someone tricks you to go into a room with no windows, and no doors, the only way out is likely going to be death. As Majikal said previously, I tend to not play characters that are VERY SUSPICIOUS of apartments, because in truth they are living domiciles where people store their shit behind a shitty lock. Could they kill you in the place they are living in? Sure. Does it cross my PC's mind every single time? No, depending on who the PC is.

What i'm seeing here is 'All of my PCs find Apartments suspicious, because I as a player know they are death traps'. I guess that's what we call a difference of playstyle, but I do find using RL examples as comparison, thinking about it in an overall meta way is, well, meta. How do your PCs think about apartments? Do they recall from the legends of yore that they are in fact death traps? Or is that the coloration of your Player Knowledge?

I don't think people should STOP USING THE REALISM ARGUMENT, or stop using any argument really. If you don't have a convincing reason to change people's minds, why should they just change their mind? Because you say so?

This is a game with magick, elves, mekillots, and undead. We aren't saying the game should be like working at the stock exchange, but a certain amount of realism breathes believability and life into a shared story, especially when it is surrounded by fantastical elements. I would rather the fantastical elements be the Magick and Elves, not the crime code.

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 10:49:25 AM
If I wanted to murder someone IRL I would lead them into a room with no exits with a door that locked if possible, especially if I didn't have to worry about any modern RL forensics after the fact.

I don't see the issue.

The issue is apartments shouldn't function that way. Hence suggesting locks be un-lockable from the inside, or other suggestions for windows. I take issue with people using the code as it is because of the unrealistic way apartment-code functions as inescapable (an argument that Tis has misinterpreted as "killing people in apartments is unrealistic")... I have no problem with murders taking place in apartments or people avoiding following people they don't trust into apartments. My problem is it stems from lame code. Escaping is too easy, and that's lame. Locking people up in apartments is too easy and that's lame.

At the end of the day if you led my character to an apartment for the prospect of sex, locked the door for privacy, and then had me undress and whipped because my character likes to be dominated, I would take no issue with suddenly being back-stabbed by your ivory hair-pin. Sadly this is not how I've seen apartment-murders go, so I think a code change would be great to combat the gamey nature of using them as inescapable death-traps.

I also think escaping an attacker is too easy, I'm just not cool with people using that as an excuse for inescapable apartments to stay as they are. I'm not calling for people who commit lock-kill murders to have their karma docked or something. I just think it's stretching to the limits of the way the code functions at the expense of good roleplay.

From another angle: It's 100% realistic to land multiple deadly strikes on someone. I don't like it when someone backstab-flee-hide-backstabs someone else because the flee code is powerful and hide code works like vanishing magic.

Quote from: Tisiphone on August 31, 2016, 10:37:48 AM

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 10:31:26 AM
I don't think people need to "stop" having their opinions, just as you are entitled to have both opinions/no opinion.

OK, cool. Let me rephrase it: when you (general you, not you Reiloth) voice the opinion that people not wanting to go into apartments strikes you as 'meta' or 'unrealistic' or whatever, it strikes me that you have very little experience with real-life analogues.

I didn't know people could be -that- elitist about a text based game. Sorry we haven't traveled the world, Tis!

Quote from: Tisiphone on August 31, 2016, 10:37:48 AM
OK, cool. Let me rephrase it: when you (general you, not you Reiloth) voice the opinion that people not wanting to go into apartments strikes you as 'meta' or 'unrealistic' or whatever, it strikes me that you have very little experience with real-life analogues.

It's not unrealistic to not want to follow someone they don't trust into an apartment, it's not unrealistic to want to kill someone in an apartment. Apartments themselves are unrealistic.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on August 31, 2016, 11:19:25 AM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 10:49:25 AM
If I wanted to murder someone IRL I would lead them into a room with no exits with a door that locked if possible, especially if I didn't have to worry about any modern RL forensics after the fact.

I don't see the issue.

The issue is apartments shouldn't function that way. Hence suggesting locks be un-lockable from the inside, or other suggestions for windows. I take issue with people using the code as it is because of the unrealistic way apartment-code functions as inescapable (an argument that Tis has misinterpreted as "killing people in apartments is unrealistic")... I have no problem with murders taking place in apartments or people avoiding following people they don't trust into apartments. My problem is it stems from lame code. Escaping is too easy, and that's lame. Locking people up in apartments is too easy and that's lame.

At the end of the day if you led my character to an apartment for the prospect of sex, locked the door for privacy, and then had me undress and whipped because my character likes to be dominated, I would take no issue with suddenly being back-stabbed by your ivory hair-pin. Sadly this is not how I've seen apartment-murders go, so I think a code change would be great to combat the gamey nature of using them as inescapable death-traps.

I also think escaping an attacker is too easy, I'm just not cool with people using that as an excuse for inescapable apartments to stay as they are. I'm not calling for people who commit lock-kill murders to have their karma docked or something. I just think it's stretching to the limits of the way the code functions at the expense of good roleplay.

From another angle: It's 100% realistic to land multiple deadly strikes on someone. I don't like it when someone backstab-flee-hide-backstabs someone else because the flee code is powerful and hide code works like vanishing magic.

Be the change.

Make a character that invents "more convenient" and higher-tech locking mechanisms and popularize them.

As it stands the technological level of locks in Zalanthas require one to have a key to both lock and unlock them from either side of the door.

I know IRL you can just "twist the knob" or "turn the latch" and most locks will unlock from the inside.

This isn't RL, this is Zalanthas.

I don't think I have an issue with this because I grew up in a very old house that would now be around 150 years old. In the house I grew up in we had an attic I was terrified of so I never went into it as a kid, but I recall the door had an old iron lock on it. The only way to get into that door was to have a key. It didn't matter what side of the door you were on it didn't unlock by "twisting the knob". It had a key hole under the knob where the heavy iron key would in theory go. (No key existed. It stayed unlocked. Well, technically it stayed locked, which prevented you from closing the door. Whoever had the key last locked the lock, but when the door was open, so you could never close it.)

I sort of just imagine Zalanthan locks to work similarly to this.

I went and found a picture. It looked more or less like this:

(http://www.featurepics.com/StockImage/20080221/old-locks-stock-image-622024.jpg)

The knob didn't function for locking and unlocking. It only functioned after you used the key one way or the other. It was a very simple very old design, so, I feel that fits Zalanthas perfectly.



I know you aren't arguing that "it isn't realistic", and I get that. But you are saying, "Lock shouldn't function that way.".

No, locks did, have, do, and can function exactly that way.

It isn't that "they shouldn't". It's that, "I don't want them to because I want the game to work differently.". Which is fine, but is a different argument.

Yeah, I agree with D-man here. I don't think the modern 'latch/deadbolt' has a place in Zalanthas. I'm already dubious of locked chests without metal components.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 11:51:58 AM
Yeah, I agree with D-man here. I don't think the modern 'latch/deadbolt' has a place in Zalanthas. I'm already dubious of locked chests without metal components.

I'm not necessarily against having locks changed.

I'm just pointing out that I don't have a problem with how they work now either because I feel they make sense. (Maybe even more sense.)

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 11:56:57 AM

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 11:51:58 AM
Yeah, I agree with D-man here. I don't think the modern 'latch/deadbolt' has a place in Zalanthas. I'm already dubious of locked chests without metal components.

I'm not necessarily against having locks changed.

I'm just pointing out that I don't have a problem with how they work now either because I feel they make sense. (Maybe even more sense.)

Don't ruin this moment of me agreeing with you D-man. You're ruining it.

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 10:53:48 AM

Quote from: Tisiphone on August 31, 2016, 10:20:21 AM

Stop using the realism argument. Apartment killings are perfectly realistic. That is, they map pretty damned well onto real life. Conversely, stop feeling like it's metagaming when you or someone else doesn't want to set foot in an apartment because they might get killed. That's also perfectly realistic.

This.

If I don't trust you IRL I'm not going to follow you into a well lit alley much less a private room somewhere that you have a key to and I don't. I don't care if that room has fifteen windows I could in theory jump out of. I'm not going to do it.

For that matter if I don't trust you I'm not going to follow you anywhere.

If someone tricks you into following them in-game to a room they have a key to and you do not and kills you, well, they didn't twink you, they just outsmarted you, which hurts, but is the truth.

No. Stop making it sound like it's a clever a tactic. It's not, it's a lame way for lame players to get the upper hand.

They didn't outsmart me. They took advantage of my good faith that they wanted to develop a story rather than win a fucking video game.

Just treat apartments as death traps ICly. Because that's what they are.

"Yolanda rented another death trap. This one's off Stonecarver's"

"Yeesh, those are the -worst- death traps. Just -stinky!"

"Have you gone over yet?"

"Over my dead body, literally!"

"Yeah, i've resisted her tempting offers so far. Though, she says she has some nice brandy..."

"Don't do it, man. It's an -apartment-."

Quote from: Yam on August 31, 2016, 12:54:16 PM
Just treat apartments as death traps ICly. Because that's what they are.

Pretty much anywhere you can be trapped. Compounds, estates, meeting rooms. All death traps. Templars are basically moving death traps. Funny that I completely avoid all of them now.

Quote from: From StaffTry not to fall into the trap of presuming the worst so never bothering and trying anything, or not keeping to the same standard of play as you're wanting from others. The game works best when giving each other the benefit of the doubt and keeping IG stuff IG - including not dismissing IC actions as OOC on the part of the other player.

I wish I could just play the game this way. God damn I wish.

But this is zero sum Armageddon.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 12:57:09 PM
"Yolanda rented another death trap. This one's off Stonecarver's"

"Yeesh, those are the -worst- death traps. Just -stinky!"

"Have you gone over yet?"

"Over my dead body, literally!"

"Yeah, i've resisted her tempting offers so far. Though, she says she has some nice brandy..."

"Don't do it, man. It's an -apartment-."

Basically yes. Unless my PCs trust someone with their life or are arrogant enough that they think they can take on the inviter (and all their pals) they wont chill at their apartment.

Granted this is how I as a person would behave in, say, Damascus.

I don't see a quick or logical code solution to change apartments being deathtraps. There could be a shift in player culture to universally pan apartment kills as bad form, but I don't think that's true or necessarily good for the game.

The bottom line is that I think apartment/compound/whatever kills are legit. The killer should face consequences if they are caught. The one being killed should make necessary precautions for betrayal (like telling their friends where they are).

Yeah, I agree that apartment killings are legit. But they are the only legit way to kill people, in some people's minds, which I don't blame them for.

I think the fact that they are a work around for the crime code is universally true though. People do it in apartments because it's the path of least resistance, and offers a 0% chance of crime code to kick in. In places like Red Storm and Luirs, crime code most certainly means death. In Allanak and Tuluk, it meant being dragged off to jail if you had no resist arrest on, and weren't currently in combat.

In essence, a legit work around (even if it is 20 years old) is still a work around. It's the environment of choice for murder, where there should be more/different avenues towards murder/violence in a populated city. I'd love for murder to happen out in the open more often. It's sad that it must occur behind closed doors in order to avoid crime code.

For example, in a 'lawless' place like the Labyrinth, you do see people draw weapons on each other and attempt to stab the hell out of them, even though they know their victim will likely run away. It always felt more "Zalanthan" to me in that way, because people weren't arbitrarily afraid of the 'Wanted Flag'. Their characters would stand up and try to shiv you if you looked at them funny. It doesn't feel possible in Allanak proper, even though I really feel like it should.

I'd say 'Apply a chance of a wanted flag on someone in Allanak if they commit a crime near a populated area, including apartments', but I feel that just feeds into the binary nature of crime code. I'd personally rather do away with the automatically applied 'wanted' flag in a populated area in the city, increase soldier patrols, and have it occur naturally. Are there soldier NPCs around? If no, your crime is legit. Are there soldier NPCs in the next room? If it's a crime worth noticing (violence) they will likely come in and try to arrest you. If it's just someone shouting thief, there's a chance they take notice. Rely on NPC soldiers, who actually witness crime, rather than a blanket 'wanted' flag. PC soldiers, too, y'know.

I dunno. I just don't really buy the 'apartments should be treated like death traps' argument. Yes, they are death traps, when considered from a meta standpoint. I suppose Tisiphone is saying 'Even in RL, people's apartments could be death traps in various places in the world i've traveled to'. OK, that's all and well. I would say in 100% of the world, people's apartments are also considered places where people live and store their stuff. Could they be a death trap? As Desertman puts it, any place that has a door that locks and can't be easily escaped from is a death trap. It just so happens that in Zalanthas/ArmageddonMUD, that's analogous to an apartment. In essence it's a 10x10 box that has a door in it that is lockable, and accessible by Commoners, etc.

I tend to think the issue is more that there are wayyyy too many soldiers on the streets, that their subdue skill is too high, and that they seem to move->subdue without suffering from the lag a PC would.

Not to mention there's like, a million templars as well as soldiers. Not as many, but still way too many.

Quote from: Jingo on August 31, 2016, 12:34:26 PM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 10:53:48 AM

Quote from: Tisiphone on August 31, 2016, 10:20:21 AM

Stop using the realism argument. Apartment killings are perfectly realistic. That is, they map pretty damned well onto real life. Conversely, stop feeling like it's metagaming when you or someone else doesn't want to set foot in an apartment because they might get killed. That's also perfectly realistic.

This.

If I don't trust you IRL I'm not going to follow you into a well lit alley much less a private room somewhere that you have a key to and I don't. I don't care if that room has fifteen windows I could in theory jump out of. I'm not going to do it.

For that matter if I don't trust you I'm not going to follow you anywhere.

If someone tricks you into following them in-game to a room they have a key to and you do not and kills you, well, they didn't twink you, they just outsmarted you, which hurts, but is the truth.

No. Stop making it sound like it's a clever a tactic. It's not, it's a lame way for lame players to get the upper hand.

They didn't outsmart me. They took advantage of my good faith that they wanted to develop a story rather than win a fucking video game.

No, they outsmarted you. They earned your good faith through clever manipulation, tricked you, and killed you. Unless you are saying you intentionally followed them in knowing they would kill you and that they never fooled you for a second...in which case...you have no argument.

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 01:52:52 PM

Quote from: Jingo on August 31, 2016, 12:34:26 PM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 10:53:48 AM

Quote from: Tisiphone on August 31, 2016, 10:20:21 AM

Stop using the realism argument. Apartment killings are perfectly realistic. That is, they map pretty damned well onto real life. Conversely, stop feeling like it's metagaming when you or someone else doesn't want to set foot in an apartment because they might get killed. That's also perfectly realistic.

This.

If I don't trust you IRL I'm not going to follow you into a well lit alley much less a private room somewhere that you have a key to and I don't. I don't care if that room has fifteen windows I could in theory jump out of. I'm not going to do it.

For that matter if I don't trust you I'm not going to follow you anywhere.

If someone tricks you into following them in-game to a room they have a key to and you do not and kills you, well, they didn't twink you, they just outsmarted you, which hurts, but is the truth.

No. Stop making it sound like it's a clever a tactic. It's not, it's a lame way for lame players to get the upper hand.

They didn't outsmart me. They took advantage of my good faith that they wanted to develop a story rather than win a fucking video game.

No, they outsmarted you. They earned your good faith through clever manipulation, tricked you, and killed you. Unless you are saying you intentionally followed them in knowing they would kill you and that they never fooled you for a second...in which case...you have no argument.

I guess if Armageddon is just a game to be won, then you would think that.

Quote from: Jingo on August 31, 2016, 01:57:33 PM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 01:52:52 PM

Quote from: Jingo on August 31, 2016, 12:34:26 PM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 10:53:48 AM

Quote from: Tisiphone on August 31, 2016, 10:20:21 AM

Stop using the realism argument. Apartment killings are perfectly realistic. That is, they map pretty damned well onto real life. Conversely, stop feeling like it's metagaming when you or someone else doesn't want to set foot in an apartment because they might get killed. That's also perfectly realistic.

This.

If I don't trust you IRL I'm not going to follow you into a well lit alley much less a private room somewhere that you have a key to and I don't. I don't care if that room has fifteen windows I could in theory jump out of. I'm not going to do it.

For that matter if I don't trust you I'm not going to follow you anywhere.

If someone tricks you into following them in-game to a room they have a key to and you do not and kills you, well, they didn't twink you, they just outsmarted you, which hurts, but is the truth.

No. Stop making it sound like it's a clever a tactic. It's not, it's a lame way for lame players to get the upper hand.

They didn't outsmart me. They took advantage of my good faith that they wanted to develop a story rather than win a fucking video game.

No, they outsmarted you. They earned your good faith through clever manipulation, tricked you, and killed you. Unless you are saying you intentionally followed them in knowing they would kill you and that they never fooled you for a second...in which case...you have no argument.

I guess if Armageddon is just a game to be won, then you would think that.

I'm sorry this is your opinion, but it is that and only that.

Quote from: Jingo on August 31, 2016, 01:57:33 PM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 01:52:52 PM

Quote from: Jingo on August 31, 2016, 12:34:26 PM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 10:53:48 AM

Quote from: Tisiphone on August 31, 2016, 10:20:21 AM

Stop using the realism argument. Apartment killings are perfectly realistic. That is, they map pretty damned well onto real life. Conversely, stop feeling like it's metagaming when you or someone else doesn't want to set foot in an apartment because they might get killed. That's also perfectly realistic.

This.

If I don't trust you IRL I'm not going to follow you into a well lit alley much less a private room somewhere that you have a key to and I don't. I don't care if that room has fifteen windows I could in theory jump out of. I'm not going to do it.

For that matter if I don't trust you I'm not going to follow you anywhere.

If someone tricks you into following them in-game to a room they have a key to and you do not and kills you, well, they didn't twink you, they just outsmarted you, which hurts, but is the truth.

No. Stop making it sound like it's a clever a tactic. It's not, it's a lame way for lame players to get the upper hand.

They didn't outsmart me. They took advantage of my good faith that they wanted to develop a story rather than win a fucking video game.

No, they outsmarted you. They earned your good faith through clever manipulation, tricked you, and killed you. Unless you are saying you intentionally followed them in knowing they would kill you and that they never fooled you for a second...in which case...you have no argument.

I guess if Armageddon is just a game to be won, then you would think that.

stop posting

Jingo's entitled to his opinion, just like anyone else posting is. Stop telling people to stop having opinions?

Yes, Jingo's clearly of a strong opinion that apartment killings aren't kosher. Many people disagree with him, but that doesn't mean he isn't entitled to think that.

He shouldn't be forced to agree with someone he disagrees with, the converse is true, this is what drives debate and discussion. People can be as bigoted and steadfast, or malleable and oscillating, in their views as they like and as suits their personality.

I will say that 'tricking' someone into going into an apartment seems like tricking the player, more than the PC. As i've stated, I rarely play PCs that are wary of domiciles. If they have reasons to be be mistrustful of a person, they'll sure as hell not follow them into shady situations. But if they've been lead to believe they're trustworthy, or that they aren't going to kill them in an apartment, they'll follow them into that apartment, ALA Majikal's reasoning.

Sure, I could play PCs that never go into apartments. I guess I find that playstyle meta -- Other people have justifications for it, and that's fine. You can justify your PC attitude with your Player Knowledge and lack of trustworthiness of the players behind PCs all you want. I'll have to take a tip from Darryl Hall and John Oates and say "I can't go for that, no no, no can do."

So -- I guess what i'm saying is if Apartment Killings are legit, then we should also not carry over our Player Knowledge of apartments being death traps, and occasionally walk into the trap. Does that make sense? Dunno if i'm being clear.

The only really valid tactic against perceived-scrub moves is to scrub right back.

Treat apartments are dangerous. Trust no one. Expect the worst. Yam made a good point that you already do this in real life.

Nenyuk Apartments are the Zalanthan equivalent to panel vans outside schools.

I've been trying to convince Jingo that trusting others not to be shit is the wrong move to no avail for some time now.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 02:17:55 PM
Jingo's entitled to his opinion, just like anyone else posting is. Stop telling people to stop having opinions?

Yam's just a grumpy grump.

Last post. Super serious.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 31, 2016, 02:23:19 PM
The only really valid tactic against perceived-scrub moves is to scrub right back.

Treat apartments are dangerous. Trust no one. Expect the worst.

I've been trying to convince Jingo that trusting others not to be shit is the wrong move to no avail for some time now.

It's sad that you think this of other players, but I imagine you've been given cause and reason to.

I tend to give players the benefit of the doubt, even if i've been given a few reasons not to. I'm either naive, or tenacious, I suppose.

I don't flee from raiders. I don't 'not follow people into apartments'. I don't consider Apartments death traps, because my PCs aren't structural engineers or aware of the Matrix and that windows in apartments don't open, etc. I don't make friends with Magickers because it's convenient. I find when detrimental things happen to my PCs, moreso than the 'good' things that happen, it's what makes Armageddon great, even if it means the death of my PC. It drives plots forward.

To repeat my mantra, I don't think Apartment Slayings are un-legit, or that people comitting them are bad players by any means. I think they are seeking the low risk/high reward option available to them. Crime code limits other possibilities.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 31, 2016, 02:23:19 PM

Nenyuk Apartments are the Zalanthan equivalent to panel vans outside schools.

Lol. Very true.

Maybe Nenyuk should just start advertising as such? I wasn't being sarcastic.

If Zalanthan Apartments really are that dangerous, it should almost be part of documentation. Like in 'help apartments', it states that apartments are some of the few lockable 10x10 boxes available to anyone with enough coin to rent one. Enter them at your own peril.

Because while it's abundantly clear to Tisiphone, who's traveled the world, and scruffy vets like us, who've been murdered/have murdered in apartments -- I imagine a Newbie would be a bit head-scratchy about 'apartments = death traps'. In fact, newbies probably get murdered the most in apartments, because they don't understand the mechanics of *click*.

There's a pretty good argument that if you are trusting other PC's only because you feel a moral obligation to "give the player a chance", then you aren't roleplaying correctly.

Either your PC trusts their PC, or they don't.

If they trust them, follow them in.

If they don't trust them, don't.

However don't follow them in because you feel some OOC obligation to act OOC'ly by following them in when your PC doesn't trust their PC.

If your PC trusts their PC and you follow them in and die because they fooled you/tricked you, then sadly, that's just the game and it perfectly reflects the incredibly harsh and murderous nature of the world.

I only go in to apartments with people I've sparred and I can be reasonably certain I can kick their ass.

If they fail to notice I forgot to sheath my sword after work it's their ooooooooown fault.

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 02:28:39 PM
There's a pretty good argument that if you are trusting other PC's only because you feel a moral obligation to "give the player a chance", then you aren't roleplaying correctly.

Either your PC trusts their PC, or they don't.

If they trust them, follow them in.

If they don't trust them, don't.

However don't follow them in because you feel some OOC obligation to act OOC'ly by following them in when your PC doesn't trust their PC.

If your PC trusts their PC and you follow them in and die because they fooled you/tricked you, then sadly, that's just the game and it perfectly reflects the incredibly harsh and murderous nature of the world.

::)

Ooo, Desertman, and I had -just- agreed with you!

Don't try to loophole me. As I stated, if my PC has a reason to mistrust another PC, they sure as hell won't be following them into an apartment. If my PC has reason to trust another PC, he isn't going to not follow them into an apartment just because it's an apartment. I'm not going to sit back in my chair and go "Well, it's an apartment Jim, I just don't know if I trust you -that- much."

Sorry, if that's considered 'Bad RP' in your book, we can just read different books from now on.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 02:30:56 PM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 02:28:39 PM
There's a pretty good argument that if you are trusting other PC's only because you feel a moral obligation to "give the player a chance", then you aren't roleplaying correctly.

Either your PC trusts their PC, or they don't.

If they trust them, follow them in.

If they don't trust them, don't.

However don't follow them in because you feel some OOC obligation to act OOC'ly by following them in when your PC doesn't trust their PC.

If your PC trusts their PC and you follow them in and die because they fooled you/tricked you, then sadly, that's just the game and it perfectly reflects the incredibly harsh and murderous nature of the world.

::)

Ooo, Desertman, and I had -just- agreed with you!

Don't try to loophole me. As I stated, if my PC has a reason to mistrust another PC, they sure as hell won't be following them into an apartment. If my PC has reason to trust another PC, he isn't going to not follow them into an apartment just because it's an apartment.

Oh that wasn't directed at YOU (or anyone). It was just a general public service announcement heh. We still agree with each other.

I didn't find your argument pretty good, by the way. So if there is a pretty good argument, maybe i'll change my opinion.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 02:33:33 PM
I didn't find your argument pretty good, by the way. So if there is a pretty good argument, maybe i'll change my opinion.

The only argument was, "If your PC wouldn't do it, then don't do it.". That seems like a pretty good argument for a roleplaying game.

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 02:34:46 PM

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 02:33:33 PM
I didn't find your argument pretty good, by the way. So if there is a pretty good argument, maybe i'll change my opinion.

The only argument was, "If your PC wouldn't do it, then don't do it.". That seems like a pretty good argument for a roleplaying game.

The converse of course is, "If your PC would do it, then do it". Which is basically what i'm saying. I as a player might be like 'Don't do it Jim, it's a trap!", but my PC will still do it.

Pretty good argument too, huh?

Reiloth is talking about the difference between player mindset and PC mindset, which I happen to agree with.

Sometimes you let (or make) your characters do things you disagree with, because it tells a better story.

Sometimes that gets you killed, and sometimes it doesn't.

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 02:37:19 PM

Quote from: Desertman on August 31, 2016, 02:34:46 PM

Quote from: Reiloth on August 31, 2016, 02:33:33 PM
I didn't find your argument pretty good, by the way. So if there is a pretty good argument, maybe i'll change my opinion.

The only argument was, "If your PC wouldn't do it, then don't do it.". That seems like a pretty good argument for a roleplaying game.

The converse of course is, "If your PC would do it, then do it". Which is basically what i'm saying. I as a player might be like 'Don't do it Jim, it's a trap!", but my PC will still do it.

Pretty good argument too, huh?

Yeah absolutely.

I'm reminded of the time I lost a ranger I loved because I opened the bag of flash powder that I as the player KNEW was flash powder heh. (Given to me by a Guilder hired to kill me.)

I am holding it and going, "Damn't, I know this is going to give me a boom and I'm going to die, but fuck, my character has no idea.".

I laugh about it now, but at the time, it was painful.

I think I've killed people in apartments more times than I've been apartment killed, which is pretty rare. Usually someone had to be someone I'd trusted who I KNEW was fucking me over and put me in a position where my PC absolutely HAD to be rid of them with no chance of escape. Not every player has such strict requirements, nor should they. "I just wanted their stuff" is a completely valid argument, no matter how much it offends my delicate sensibilities. I've been apartment killed for less than THAT even, hard as it may be to believe. Was it legit? Yes, the characters involved in it had their own motivations and were acting on them. Is it a way I would ever allow one of my PCs to act? No, but that's just my personal preference. The only complaints I'd have would be from an OOC perspective on how this may effect plotlines, and the only answer to my complaints is: Welcome to Armageddon.

As others have said, apartment killings happen everyday IRL. Some of you are less trusting of other people, myself, I weitgh risk vs. reward and actually DO follow complete strangers in bad areas into places more private, it's not like there's a cop on every street corner, and the local culture is such that if the cops DO come around asking questions about a straight up murder in the streets, no one is going to be talking about it. At that point, whether I get knifed in private or in the open streets is like splitting hairs. I'm all FOR making the streets of Allanak less safe, as I believe it would lead to more realistic roleplay because you'd realize maybe that person whose life you're ruining may catch you slpping, and adjust your behavior accordingly, rather than RPing like, "Well my base has an invincible forcefield" like so many of the godmoders in the sandbox would do with their GI Joes.

I want violence in the streets to reflect the theme and setting, and to provide more plots that it takes away. When someone kills someone in an apartment, it makes the story like, welp, haven't seen Amos in a long time, wonder what happened to that guy? If risk vs. reward were tweaked in the streets, you might better understand WHAT happened to Amos when you find his stab-wound riddled corpse attracting flies in a gutter. I know for a fact it DOES happen IG in the streets, just, it's so heavily skewed toward risk there that many will come to the logical conclusion that an apartment is the best place for it. Murder is going to happen IG, it's not going away, and it's not just going to explode with sheer random buffoonery just because it's easier to do it in the streets now. Also it'd make people a little less afraid of going IN apartments with people.

The only reason I support being able to unlock the door from the inside, and this is a big reason for me, is not to avoid PKs, but for OOC concessions to guests my PC may be having over. I'd hate to lock someone in to keep outsiders out and then my computer or connection dies, or some RL emergency tears me away, which isn't my IC intention, and my PC is just standing around like, duuuuhr. So I'm torn on the issue, slightly leaning toward not in favor of a change on how locks work from the inside.

Plus, it just makes a much more awesome storyline that so and so was observed fucking around with the wrong crowd and a mysterious figure cut them down in broad daylight and fled the scene. It's more effective that way, sends a message to other players "Don't fuck with X", where X is the last person or group the person was observed fucking with, and thus leads to fewer future PKs, as, fewer players will fuck with X and so will not need to be disposed of. You don't get that with a quiet kill that leaves no trace or rumor. You don't get that panic like "Fuck, Amos was my best friend! What, what if I'm NEXT?!". You just get a long time of "contact Amos" and continuing to fuck with X, until you fall for some honeypot trap and get diced.

I think I've only had one of my PCs killed in an apartment once. I reported it not because she was killed, but because they abused the code of psionics to get it done. Basically - back in the day, if you tried to way someone and they weren't logged in or dead, you'd get a different message than if their mind was just hard to find. So the killer tried to way my character's boss, and discovered his player wasn't logged in. And therefore they knew it was safe to PK me because I wouldn't be able to way my boss to get help. That was one of the reasons the code for waying was changed, but I still didn't get a resurrection. It was also over 10 years ago.

I've played characters who got assassinated lots of times, and only that one (that I can remember) was ever ganked in an apartment. So from my perspective, this really isn't -that- much of an issue. If they need to kill your character, they'll figure out a way. I've PKed only a few characters total, and I don't think I killed any of them in an apartment. Only one or two right out in the open, the rest behind closed doors, clan doors, behind curtains, or in a cave (where the victim could easily have fled out).

Sure it'd be nice to be able to open the door from the inside without a key. However, I can see it being -very- easily abused. Follow someone to their apartment, knowing they need to log out for the day. They log out, you grab everything you need, don't even need to have the lockpick skill. Just open the door and leave with all their loot. I dunno - I don't really like the ease in which that can be done, with this kind of change.

You know, a thought just occurred to me. The reason apartment killing MIGHT be investigated, is if someone habitually does it. THEN people might whisper things to the person at the desk. Nenyuk would likely be quite interested in, you know, not having their property damaged by corpses, blood, and what have you. At which point I'd expect them to wait for you to leave, inspect your place, and if it's not up to code, waiting for you to come home and being like, hi, we heard you like apartment killing, so we put some apartment killing in your apartment killing. Then taking all your shit and renting the place out to a less messy tennent.

Right, but there are plenty of people that have been killed in apartments (some of which are talking here, some of which aren't). So I would call your 'killed only one time in an apartment in 10+ years of playing' an outlier.

Also, I feel that part of the problem here is psionics. While that is assuredly a lame scenario (Contacting PC's boss to see if they are around, knowing they aren't, so timing your attack for that moment), part of the 'fear' and 'perceived problem' here is that victims can easily get away and way Soandso to let them know someone tried to kill them.

It reminds me of gumshoe novels in the 40's, and more modern crime that has to account for things like cellphones, the internet, and google. There was a certain mystique to crime before the internet/cellphones/etc, because it was easier to get away with murder, the trail of mystery was more intriguing because the search for knowledge and answers was half if not more of the mystery. A film like 'Chinatown" would be boring if Jake could just look up the history of the DWP and who ran it, and why Ellis Mullwray was in cahoots with Mr. Cross. The pursuit of knowledge can be the most interesting parts of these stories.

I mention this an analogy because in a low-technology world, advanced psionics are obviously at odds with it. To be able to communicate with someone across great distances with perfect clarity and instantaneous results is highly advanced. So we're basically giving everyone a cellphone that has 911 on speed dial. So I can understand why someone waits to see if your friends are around before they murder you. Just as apartments are a work around for crime code, waying your friends to see if they're around before murdering you is a work around for psionics. It's legit, IMHO.

It's a sticky pickle.

Quote from: Dunetrade55 on August 31, 2016, 05:04:05 PM
You know, a thought just occurred to me. The reason apartment killing MIGHT be investigated, is if someone habitually does it. THEN people might whisper things to the person at the desk. Nenyuk would likely be quite interested in, you know, not having their property damaged by corpses, blood, and what have you. At which point I'd expect them to wait for you to leave, inspect your place, and if it's not up to code, waiting for you to come home and being like, hi, we heard you like apartment killing, so we put some apartment killing in your apartment killing. Then taking all your shit and renting the place out to a less messy tennent.

I think Staff does this already, at least i've encountered it with serial murderers in apartment complexes. I've had things like blood drips echoed in my apartment (From the apartment above) and things like that. They end up being hooks to PCs to investigate or report, putting it back in the PC world rather than keeping it purely virtual/amongst NPCs. Maybe the PC does nothing about it, and doesn't report it to the authorities. Maybe they tip off a soldier to it. Maybe something happens from it, maybe not.

I do think it would be funny if your rent suddenly got raised. They don't ask questions, so you don't ask questions.

The first time I was killed in an apartment, it was by cheaters who are now banned AFAIK. Second time, I knew it was a trap. It was a lame and obvious trap but I still went for it. I said why not. ICly my character was hoping for people to work with. :'(

Again I don't think killing people in locked rooms or apartments is wrong, however I think killing someone else in YOUR own apartment should have some consequences. Sorry, that would be a lot of blood on the floor in a world where cleaning water is expensive.

This one time though i was attacked openly somewhere in the city. They didn't get me, but even if they had it was heart thumping experience. There were people screaming bloody murder too.  They sure took a risk and made the entire attack fun instead of insta-gank with barely any RP despite the levels of karma involved with a place the victim has no hope of escaping. Its why I want to encourage people to attack more in the open and wouldn't mind giving them the abilities needed to get away themselves after a failed attempt.  It tends to create more fun and more RP for more people, without the lame after taste of apartment ganks, or OHK backstabs.