Alright so just outta the gate I'm gonna say it's not about any particular PC or group of PCs but I've noticed a smooth trend happening and it's kinda concerning. Law, Law Enforcement, Law upholding, and Law Abiding PCs should really, really, really reign it in. I understand well that the law is the law, and I know all too well that we get what we sow. I accept that.
The problem is it is a one way street. If a criminal PC kills too many lawman people yell about griefing. If a Lawman kills a Criminal it's "Execution". My last two prominent PCs got brought down in similar fashion. Yes I know I deserved it. Yes I know I did some things that fully warranted my death, but at the same time there was a small and sizable concern floating in my head.
DMs are not above this either mind you. On DM factions it's not uncommon for a "Bring this so and so in" post to be made by an NPC. Yet at the same time PCs see that as a "Dead or alive" order.
It's a complicated issue I know but it's just something that has been highlighted lately for me. After allowing a wounded man to flee I was captured and executed the next day by the same man on one PC. On another After leaving people alive at a sizable PvP, I am captured and executed a few days later. It's why Crime is slow low in EFU I honestly think. It's not a blast at Law PCs at all. It's awesome and done with a T. to the utmost.
The deaths have be great and executions are often a great endlude for a character's story.
The problem is the more it occurs the more it just starts to feel like a grind. The reward for allowing PC's to survive a PvP encounter is...
Dead 2-5 days later. The reward for not allowing PCs to survive a PvP encounter, and FDing people is being cast as a "Unfair player", a "Story ender", a "Killing Jerk".
The story is great, the action is great, the adventure is great, the conflict is great- It just feels a lot like a lose/lose situation no matter what way its sliced.
An IC lawman is expected to act like an IC lawman.
An IC criminal is expected to have decorum and prudence, not full loot, not blatantly FD on first encounter, "Earn the right" to end a character, is so one.
It's like trying to fight with one hand behind your back, and in that hand behind your back is a live grenade with a pin pulled.
Boom.
Frag or Plasma?
Or is it pulse, because with pulse we have a whole new problem...
But on a serious note, I agree with RwG that the lawmen are given a greenlight perse in many cases in hunting criminals. FD should be earned on both sides of the street.
imo i think dms should start trying to enforce pvp courtesy, as in pcs should have their right to fd another rejected if there isnt a good reason behind it...and especially when pcs have not even met before
It's the path some of us take. I play villains non stop and almost every character I have played dies if I lose PvP, yet I rarely kill people unless it's well deserved or earned. I see no real problem with it, but I don't think said "lawmen" should be too surprised if they are killed now and then on the same basis that they are killing villains. Sometimes a point needs to be made in-character when the law becomes complacent with their free ride on the subdual train. My only dislike of this 'system' is that villains are often OOCly accused of doing "whatever they can to win", a harsh statement I think when they're the only ones often at risk.
Yet with law it tends to be, that if you killed once and threaten to do so again, it tends to get criminals killed.
The lawmen rarely take the first strike, so to say, and react to a threat. It's never that simple, but often it goes so. They got insitutional agenda and act upon it, where the criminals often go about on a personal agenda - and as much as I see people writing how they are merciful, you don't sound very merciful when you ask those couple of guys you killed.
Several cases of mercy may not help if you've chosen to kill few times before, and I've seen plenty of cases where the law has offered options to get out. Criminals just never accept them. It happens on all sides. This has not changed.
What has changed is that people seek more and more destructive conflict, and assume they earn mercy on each side. Yet without will to repent, rectify or try to turn the tables around when caught for their chosen actions, it tends to have little other option than one that is coming.
I firmly disagree with the notion of enforcing PVP courtesy.
I have seen an unnamed server ruined by over-authoritative DMing. I like that it is left to player discretion.
However, it does seem like there is a bit of a double-standard when it comes to expectations. When an NPC puts a bounty on a PC, said NPC's PC underlings enforce it mercilessly, and are rewarded for doing so (such as earning honors in the Armada).
Criminal PCs, on the other hand, seem to carry with them a certain expectation that they will not be so merciless. If being a Stygian means hunting a certain PC with FD intentions, why can that PC not FD all Stygians it sees?
The answer might well be that it's not very courteous, and it reduces things to a deathmatch arena for the criminal to do so. However, the lawmen have already done that with a similar mentality.
It seems only fair and justifiable that if a faction full of players is extremely zealous in mercilessly putting down its enemies (which I think can be very ICly justified!), its enemies might be equally zealous and merciless in slaughtering members of that faction.
Faction A who slaughters John Jack James on sight. John Jack James who slaughters Faction A on sight. Both should be equally legitimate or illegitimate, regardless of your opinion on PVP. However, the former seems to be seen as extremely legitimate, while the latter is deemed illegitimate.
Finally, to clarify, I'm speaking about what I've noticed as the general culture of the server, not about how DMs have ruled in any particular situation!
Well. As the law, you can't really let people go when you catch them. BUT! You can provide sportmanship in other ways: You dont need use your deadliest combo of spells / abilities at all time. If you are particularly at a discrepancy in level / status, you can leave the hunt to the lower ranking members, etc. This was easier to judge in the old days since you could see player levels in the player list, but you can still make assumption based on when they were created, what spells they use and what challenge they take. Of course, you shouldn't expect that kind of leniency if your reputation grows bigger and bigger.
This might seem as poor PvP skills in IRC. Like, "zOMG, why didn't you haste and like dispelled and hold person.", but whatever man; It's usually much more fun in PvP when no side wins, both side keep their dignity, and the rivalry grows.
Mort, as ever, speaks wisdom.
The problem with courtesy is that it isn't guaranteed to be returned. That's why its special.
Of the recent events I am aware of, criminals who tend to become a bit more subdued in the dirt get mercy street (even when they don't necessarily ICly deserve it). It's very hard to cut someone a break when they are being a hardass in the dirt. If that's their character, its fine, its just not always possible.
In another example I can think of faction PCs were given strong pressure to capture and FD numerous individuals that had wronged NPCs. This is a DM initiative - I think that the characters in question had profited from various crimes, and this was the reprocussion. There are, of course, no rewards that are without risk, so I hope their found their rewards fitting.
Crime and chaos are different. You can be chaotic and not a criminal. You can be lawful and an absolute criminal. Taking on the man is risky, but its quite a ride. Just be ready for the reprocussions.
Definitely Semli, and I know. To adress your point Paha I'm gonna call nonsense I'm afraid.
The Law is obscenely proactive once something is known to them. You can't even play a Mugger in the streets before you get your teeth kicked in and either fined an obscene amount/enslaved/executed.
I mean, the best way I can think about it is like- It's against the law to speed. A police officer can give you a speeding ticket for speeding. However also everyone knows the times when "Warnings" are given.
I'm not saying murder should be welcomed in the streets by any means. I'm not saying Crime should get a free pass for the sake of advancing the story. I'm just saying that it's all about rapport. Crime and Law is cat and mouse, or maybe more likely Dog and cat.
The best story comes when it's cat and mouse, or the Sergeant of the guard sends a band of privates to build a case, or a detective spends time building a case against a criminal.
EFU doesn't really have that. By the time you've committed a crime you may as well just commit 10,000,000,000,000,000 of them because the penalty will just be the same as doing one.
After a crime is commited the law is no longer a "reactionary" force. They can build up the PC plot and story as much or as little as they want. "He broke the law" doesn't have to mean drag him in for slavery. "That wizard is a Renegade" doesn't mean the Conclave needs to send out gank squads to bring them before the Pentumverate.
If law PCs were less gung-ho about OOCly bringing in threats, there's 10,000 ways you can ICly justify that course of action to let the story flourish.
Informants, interrogations, foot work/leg work, a few brawls in the streets, a few threats, sending goons after them, turning the public against them building up their infamy as a wanted man, etc.
Anything beyond "That guy who transitioned twice to the wastrel and back says a guy we heard murdered someone is sitting in there. Wizard, buff me up. I'm going arresting".
I think this post is more about encouraging people to follow other venues than straight to FD, if and when they can. To me, a good enemy is just as important as a good ally. It should not be factions or NPC's that your character works against, but PC's, and if you want your PC - who I assume is the hero of your own personal story-to have a good, enjoyable run, then the villain of your story shouldn't die too quickly either.
That isn't PvP courtesy, that's good story-telling. Killing one of your enemies now may be a good boost to your rep, your supplies and your ego. But it makes for a shitty story. If your PC is meant to be great, then their enemies should be at that same level. Killing them should make you even more impressive as a result. There should not be a 'meh' reaction when you kill another PC, in an ideal world. If you rock out, give your enemies a chance to rock out as well. You're bound to enjoy clashing with each other much more.
Are all lawmen squeaky clean, or could your corrupt infantryman accept a bribe in return for sparing a criminal's life, off the record? Are all criminals vengeful cutthroats, or could it be useful to have an informant on the Stygian payroll? There are definitely optionsl: the mindset however, seems to be that you have to kill a criminal convicted of high treason 'because it says so.'
I am only saying it as my own opinion. I have never been good at playing a murderer. Even with Kreil I believe I killed only one guy in the end, and that was out of order to execute him.
However I myself have always died so far to either my own mistake, or to attempting these different venues - often to rather poor result when the victim of this venue returns to kick my own ass to the death or some of my weaker fellows.
I say it goes both ways. Criminals who start the acts of crime, need to be aware of consequences. However lawmen as well can be merfciful, but it depends of the character. Some are corrupted and eagerly make trades, be it for RP favors or bribe. Some more goodly fellows give ways out in terms of vows (You can always lie, they don't know it), repentance or just groveling. It's not easy on either side.
There can be chases if they don't start with something serious. Kicking teeths in and toughening up is pretty much something that many criminals do, yet it turns ugly when folks start doing something that kills or threatens life of others.
On top of it all there is always the option of being monster, some universally hated/hunted insitution and so that may make it more harder to justify things in one way or another. I strongly believe that courtesy goes both ways. Threats have a sharper end when they are directed to already voulnerable and cornered targets, and those cornered targets tend to get protective of themselves if they feel their characters future is at stake. And those that are defeated also need to try and accept a way out if one is given, even when it at times is quite unfavorable.
In the end there is no clear solution. If you want to build more rivalry, it needs to start from an individual and aiming for it, rather than building more blade to blade conflict. Someone pushy with blade is always a scary threat, and humans tend to want and get such a threat out of the picture to save themselves.
Nothing has changed really.
If Faction X kills one of your allies you are perfectly justified in slaying members of Faction X as if they were the ones inflicting the killing blow. Being a member of a faction means you take responsibility for every single member's actions, whether they are your friend or foe within the faction. If somebody calls you out on this and won't accept your reason as a valid one just ignore them.
There will never be any hard and fast guideline for when to FD and when to SD and there will always be one or two people who get upset over either outcome. You'll never please everyone.
avenues
Let them all live. Mort will know his own.
*ahem*
I see one possible solution: take away Armada authority to pronounce sentence. Place it in the hands of PC magistrates. It need not mean reintroduction of trials, only that the power of the Armada is reduced and placed in the hands of third parties not necessarily as emotionally bound up in the matter. Or bribable third parties more financially bound up in the matter. Or at any rate people who may not be as PvP-happy...
In the Order it could be done by saying that the Templars conducting the trial should, if at all possible, not be the same ones offended against/involved in combat and capture.
Actually this could create more plot. A Magistrate too eager to hand out death sentences would become a prize Docks target. One too bribable might become a Stygian target. One too lax might be desired dismissed...
'Eh.
Trials were -really- boring. A lot of the people involved bitched after the fact that they would have preferred a quicker FD (see recent post where character had drawn out death involving trial, said to do it faster next time). It is good for plot, good for immersion, but ultimately pointless and annoying for the person that has to sit through it if death is a foregone conclusion (or rather, even a strong possibility).
Sometimes it helps showing people how you'd like it to turn out ("Please don't kill me!" "W-w-wait, you gotta give me a trial, or some shit?" "If I get out of this, I'm gonna kill all you sons-of-bitches!"). They don't necessarily have to act on that, but they might take it into consideration.
Probably Naga sums it up best. We're all in it to win it, so, I don't know what to tell ya'.
If people are given the choice wether to be courteous, and consistently choose not to be, there are two solutions to the problem (as opposed to doing nothing).
The bad solution is enforcing courtesy, as noted before.
The good solution is taking the decision out of their hands.
Get other players than the ones who just got their adrenaline pumping from PvP to make the decision.
PC magistrates. Do it.
Trials are very good if the PC accused is a sneaky bastard who can use bribed/threatened/corrupt witnesses, fast-talking and alibis to get out of a sentence. Or in the rare cases where a PC is innocent. If the PC doesn't have a chance in hell of getting off and the player would rather just end it, I can see how one would be frustrating. On the other hand though, my most annoying moments on crooked PCs have been when they've tried to turn the tables on their accuser or offer to sell out some of their associates for freedom, only to be rebuffed by a swift NPC judgement.
As it stands IC, it's only supposed to be High Treason that doesn't allow a trial. I can see a problem is that DMs don't want to keep an NPC possessed to officiate over trials, so they favour summary judgements to allow them to move on and run something else. Fair enough, that's where PC magistrates shine because that means a player WANTS to be involved.
IMO, a good solution would be to appoint PC magistrates as well as using the NPC Tyrran, but only if the PC who was convicted demands to appeal the judgement or the Stygian wants a trial for whatever reason. ICly, your average thug might not have bothered to read about how to appeal. That allows a player to avoid a trial if they just want to get on and roll up a new PC or pay the fine and be done with it, or to contest the judgement if they want to.
A PC you're constantly chasing and skirmishing with might be interesting, but how much cooler a conflict is a mob boss you can't get any crimes to stick to even if you do catch them? Or someone who always escapes before trial? That's the sort of thing that promotes using assassins, informants, maybe going against your own laws to put an end to them.
If a criminal PC doesn't want to do the trial because they don't stand a chance they can plead guilty and hope for leniency. Eventually it comes down to how much style the magistrate wants to put into it.
Trials allow for more RP and are great, there would be more of them if PC's could actually conduct them instead of forcing a DM to do it.
I think you should be railing against the best ganking class in the game being given teleportation and scrying instead of the law/criminal dichotomy, which hasn't really changed since EFU's inception. ;)
Basically, if you roll up a PC who is evil/chaotic and has devious or murderous plans, you sign up for being FD'd by law enforcement if you're caught. Its an invisible contract you sign at the character creation screen, similar in fact to choosing to play a monstrous subrace.
Also, PC magistrates are indeed sweet. I support that.
The thing with trials is actually a very good point and is mentioned ICly. Crimes that are not judged to be against the dominion or very high profile are meant to have a trial for those suspected of involvement. The Armada is really meant to pronounce judgement only in the cases of dangerous and well known criminals, although the laws may have changed since then. However if they are like that it means those pcs who know they will be fd'd will have it over quickly and those that don't will get a chance.
I still haven't gotten into the pvp angle of the server, though I intend to. I just wanted to say I really dig the magistrate and trial idea. If someone doesn't want that side they can always just say so and end their char. With the magistrates and trials and such the potential RP value is too good to pass up, imo.
QuoteIf Faction X kills one of your allies you are perfectly justified in slaying members of Faction X as if they were the ones inflicting the killing blow. Being a member of a faction means you take responsibility for every single member's actions, whether they are your friend or foe within the faction.
No, lol. It's normal to expect hostility, but that's not how you should roll at all. People from Lower killing newly made Spellguard because they have a grudge against .... whatever should have nailed it in your head that each character should be treated separately, and that's it's 'ok' to provide hostility (i.e. threaten, be on your guard, be suspicious, etc.), but not necessairly SLAY as IF you had an history with each of them. Same goes for PC faction 'gang'. Just because a random 'name' has been tagged to a great criminal by some joe-informant doesn't give the crimes of the great criminal to this 'name' and law enforcers should treat each PC separately.
The issue with trials, as said, is some are really really boring. If captured I'd 100% of the time rather FD instead of having to sit through a bunch of PCs I've never met having pomp and circumstance about my demise.
And yeah Caddies, I know it's a thing you accept when you choose the mad life of awesome crime. I fully plan to continue doing it but it was just something I noticed lately and thought to highlight. By all means don't let this chase anyone from being a criminal. Crime is most awesome and should be fully pursued!
It is actually one of my goals if I get approved to be a Stygian to FD the least amount of people possible simply because I've played so many criminals lol.
Kill 'em all, let the DM's Sort it out..
Sarcasm aside, FD should be an honor, earned. Don't sully it by being a noob and running off to get your gank on, if someone let's you live. FFS, IC you just got mercy from certain death, it should change your world view a bit, take an ooc beat and think on that, not the ooc fact you just got your ass handed to you in PVP..
And if your FDing folk's regardless if Jonnie Law or Joe Docks, you just earned that honor for yourself, so don't be surprised if you get it reciprocated. At a certain level, conflict is pretty much all there is..so think before you end some really good rp-how quickly will you be bored crushing the same quests over and over, if this enemy/antagonist/etc is removed from the game world? Simple case of take a beat, and think before you act. Just because it is IC and story appropriate to kill them, does not necessarily mean you should. It is a game, after all, and needs players to work well.
Just my two cents worth.
Bail bonds
(http://cdn.blogs.sheknows.com/realitytvmagazine.sheknows.com/2010/10/dog-the-bounty-hunter-duane-chapman-wants-to-talk-to-randy-and-evi-quaid.jpg)
I don't agree with some of what is being said in this thread. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. I'm not aware of many incidents occurring in which executions are handed out prematurely; this is a harsh and challenging server and should remain such.
A cautious criminal that rarely kills tends not to be executed, but PCs that embrace heavy notoriety and is involved in FD should surely expect the possibility of being caught and facing consequences. It would be rather dull otherwise.
In my opinion monstrous PCs should be slaughtered and killed without much mercy, if you sign up to play one you should be aware that is your probable ultimate fate.
Guidelines about PvP Karma remain true, and demonstrating IC and OOC courage by not necessarily killing your enemies is always something to be encouraged.
Concerns about specific incidents should be brought to the attention of the DM team. And for what it's worth, I do think RWG's most recent death is something that should be discussed privately with those involved but has no bearing on this thread.
Having been on both sides of this divide, I can honestly say that the best answer is just to keep it IC, with a mind for OOC consideration.
Though it is comical, I am reminded of Dr. Evil and Scott Evil arguing about the best way to deal with Austin Powers. Scott pulling a gun and saying "I'll pop him right now!", and Dr. Evil saying "You're just not getting this, are you Scott..."
Really, indentured servitude exists as a means of continuing some characters that are caught but are also deserving of a second chance, and in my estimation it exists in place of the (ICly unfeasable) Life Sentence. Perhaps it's use should be broadened among both Enforcement Factions?
Anyways, just a thought.
Death happens, most definitely. And of course those who do not wish the mad life of crime should most definitely avoid it. My post was not anything about the death or the circumstances around it. The violent conflict and chance of death is what sparks that adrenaline rush when conflict comes knocking around the bend. Half the fun of playing a monster is the hunt of course, and the same could be said of any notably good, or evil PC. Enemies are made and stories woven of such grand schemes.
The point being raised was from a life-time criminals perspective it feels like the noose is getting tighter the last few months. I agree that crime is hard, I agree that matters are difficult. I'm just saying that the way things are going it casts a vicious and harsh light on the matter.
Maybe a more criminal advocating DM group is needed or something else I don't know. It just feels like Conclave, Order, Stygians, all are given encouraged reign to pursue, capture, and handle with extreme crushitude once a threat comes to light.
Crime is fun. Don't get me wrong. I love it, I'll keep doing it, and it's what keeps me in EFU. It is just one of those things that grinds after a while as things are seen from all angles playing a criminal against the various different factions.
People claim the Sons are a balance but they are not nearly as present as the Order, Dominion, or even Conclave in terms of NPC notoriety and action taken.
I happen to think people who run around PVPing randomly get whatever they deserve and incidentally, that is why i'm taking a break.
A point I would like to make on Player Character judges. The options are available for players to become Lords who are responsible for handing out judgments. But seeing the lack of PC lords there is a lack of PCS judging criminals. So if players are concerned of a lack of PC Judges become a lord already!
For those who are talking about hating waiting for trials and hating waiting I have a simple solution. You get arrested and you aren't automatically getting the death penalty, make a new char to hang out on while you wait for the trial. If you die, you have a char ready, if you don't die you can continue playing the one who was on trial and you have another char for when he does finally die.
"Any more gunplay gets answered. You call the law in Sampson, you don't get to call it off just cause you're liquored up and popular on payday."
There are a lot of ways to get creative about capturing criminals without necessarily executing or enslaving criminals. Unless you're playing a paladin, giving some consideration for the greater good could be an interesting way to pursue your assignments without spilling too much blood. Consider the following situation.
John, a violent criminal, has a warrant for a non-capital crime like mugging. Sergeant Ken orders Private Mark to do something about these muggings, so he starts investigating the case. After a few days of hard work, Pvt. Mark uncovers some evidence that John is the criminal in question. He can either:
A. Gear up with Privates Carl, Susan, and Luke and knock John's teeth in. If there are other charges to consider, executing John could be considered.
Probable Result: Maybe Pvt. Mark gets a promotion? Maybe not. Evil gradually circles again, and a new villain emerges.
B. Pvt. Mark thinks he can trust Pvt. Susan, so the two of them set a trap for John. They may or may not beat him up and threaten to drag him to a cell if he doesn't start informing on Veronica, another criminal, and perhaps use his mugging skills to track down a lost suit of Armada armor.
Probable Result: Pvt. Mark gets a promotion when he successfully uses information John provided to solve a few major crimes. Maybe Mark has to question his ethics and cut a few deals to keep his informant alive. Can he trust Pvt. Susan, his old partner? Is John giving him solid information? He better hire spies to keep an eye on each.
This sort of creativity may be tricky for a paladin's rigorous code, but for the rest of us it's a much cooler way to handle a criminal you don't want to FD right away.
IMO players just need not to be assholes. It has happened to me as well, Dram Nermoot died because he let Mummed live, next time i spoke to him, he killed me. I wasn't bitter, but Dram had been my best character, maybe it still is, so it was disapointing.
(I'm not calling Mummed's player an asshole, that was an exageration to dramatise the idea..)
If somone were to spare my PC's life in a situation were FD was called for, i would step away form that PC at least for a while.