I fought the law and the law won

[Random_White_Guy]

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.

[Black_TopHat]

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.

[Damien]

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

[VanillaPudding]

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.

[Paha]

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.

[12 Hatch]

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!

[Mort]

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.

[DangerousDan]

Mort, as ever, speaks wisdom.

[Semli]

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.

[Random_White_Guy]

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".

[Blue41]

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.'

[Paha]

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.

[TheImpossibleDream]

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.

[9lives]

avenues

[The Old Hack]

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...