No one uses the Assassins' Guild

[Mattamue]

Please don't add losing a lease to a contract.

Otherwise, why not make contracts a DM run thing? Still mechanically getting a contract on a board, but now the target has the assurance that at least there was oversight and thought put into the hit. The contractor has whatever RP angle vetted and their exposure to the assassin and the target gets drama injected as the DM guides it. At that point I'd be much happier as a player not having a buyout option, and there'd be some assurance against the ooc-ness of the payout if we all know there's oversight for this admittedly thematically difficult topic.

[Gouge Away]

I don’t think the problem is in the mechanical system, so much. It’s that it is difficult to build RP around the guild itself. Every assassin is more or less on their own.

I think the guild should be modeled after the Harpers and anyone with an assassin token has full access to the building. Allow people who would be assassin associates to take a token without assassin levels, though they wouldn't be allowed to fill contracts on their own.

I think there should be clerics of Mask and demented bards and so on who can hang out there and be recruited to go on contracts with assassins or aid with their work. It could be a place of evil intelligence gathering and plotting… I’d love it if assassin guild members who weren’t stealthy killers but had high disguise were out there infiltrating other groups and meeting at that HQ.

[Dr. B]

Every assassin is more or less on their own.

That's not the issue. The assassins (at least many of them) know who each other are and want to work with each other--there is just no work to begin with.

Here's my suggestion:

Basically, a period of time should elapse before a target PC can pay off the guild. Perhaps the duration of that period could increase with the amount of gold. Importantly, the time period only elapses when the target is online and active, i.e., getting RPR ticks.

GrumpyCat rightly said that there is no perfect solution, but to my mind this is the best one available:

1. It makes the guild useful.
2. It allows counterplay, as the target can eventually pay off the bounty.
3. It preserves anonymity.
4. It allows every member of the guild an opportunity, in principle, to take out the target. This seems to me to be very important and the reason for having the guild. Otherwise, there may as well be no guild; people should just be independent operators, and they can do that without the guild.
5. It prevents abuse in the form of not logging in until the bounty is paid off.
6. Incidentally, and hilariously, it actually makes the food/water system relevant, as a character may need to leave their quarters to restock if they run out.

Some will object that there is no interaction between assassins and clients. I'm not sure that bothers me very much, to be honest, especially given anonymity.

[Diegovog]

The problem with making the bounty unpayable for a period is that the character will just log off or sit safely in guild houses until they can pay.

[Nobs]

The problem with making the bounty unpayable for a period is that the character will just log off or sit safely in guild houses until they can pay.

Sad times if that is true.

[Dr. B]

The problem with making the bounty unpayable for a period is that the character will just log off or sit safely in guild houses until they can pay.

Read my post more carefully. I'll quote the relevant part here:

Importantly, the time period only elapses when the target is online and active, i.e., getting RPR ticks.

Hence they cannot log off to wait out the freeze on payoffs. They can sit in their guildhouse, correct, but they'll have to be active, walking around and emoting things, etc. I have no issue with that--if they want to avoid assassination so badly that they are willing to suffer through 12, 15, maybe 24 RL hours of cabin fever, awesome. They can RP turning into a reclusive nut, and that might just be part of the fun of putting a hit on them in the first place.

[Nitro]

The problem with making the bounty unpayable for a period is that the character will just log off or sit safely in guild houses until they can pay.

Read my post more carefully. I'll quote the relevant part here:

Importantly, the time period only elapses when the target is online and active, i.e., getting RPR ticks.

Hence they cannot log off to wait out the freeze on payoffs. They can sit in their guildhouse, correct, but they'll have to be active, walking around and emoting things, etc. I have no issue with that--if they want to avoid assassination so badly that they are willing to suffer through 12, 15, maybe 24 RL hours of cabin fever, awesome. They can RP turning into a reclusive nut, and that might just be part of the fun of putting a hit on them in the first place.

Shorter periods are easy to idle away in a quarter and RP with friends in safety. Longer periods like 24 RL hours that all require online activity to tick away is prohibitively restrictive to players who only have 2 hours of playtime each day.

[Dr. B]

Shorter periods are easy to idle away in a quarter and RP with friends in safety. Longer periods like 24 RL hours that all require online activity to tick away is prohibitively restrictive to players who only have 2 hours of playtime each day.

Part of the issue comes down to how long the duration should be, and whether (as I suggested) it should increase with the amount of gold paid. But regardless of whether a player has only 2 hours of playtime per day or is online all the time, the dilemma is in both cases the same: either spend those hours in the safety of your quarters, pacing around and pulling your hair out, or leave your quarters, but face the risk of assassination. That is largely the point of the suggestion: assassins can actually kill you now, which means someone has a reason to pay them to do it.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

I like some of your ideas. Especially since there is still room and place for independent operators, which I think is also important. Not shoe horning all assasins into one npc guild

[Dr. B]

Having given this more thought, I'm going to throw out an amended suggestion:

Basically, the guild should work exactly the way it does now, with two changes:

First, a freeze on payoffs for a number of RL hours to be decided by the developers. Also up to the developers: whether the hours scale with the sum of the bounty, and whether the hours are counted when the PC is offline. I'm undecided on these questions and would like to hear more input from other people reading this.

Second, and important: the PC does not get notified that they are being targeted until after the freeze has expired.

This gives a slight starting advantage to the guild, in that it gives them a chance to get the drop on the target. If the assassin fails, then the upper hand shifts to the target, who is now alerted to their status as a target.

The current PvP rule pertaining to assassins would still apply: they can interact with a target and then have 24 hours where they can ambush them. Of course, it would probably not be prudent to do so, but that's for the assassin to worry about.

I think this is a reasonable solution. It creates an incentive for people to hire the guild, and conversely, it creates a disincentive if the guild members fail to do their job well.

[The GrumpyCat]

I like your ideas Mr. B, I think the only concern I have - and one easily ammended, is that if an assassin did collect the bounty before that time ran up, then they MUST use the dagger on the corpse ASAP.
This is (and I also presume that when in fugue, the target gets a message that the dagger has been used on them) to ensure that the target knows that the killing was an assassination, and not some random gank.
I also think that it would need a trial period, and possibly the minimum in 'assassin bounty' might need to be raised, to prevent it being over used. But in principle it might work.

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

Having given this more thought, I'm going to throw out an amended suggestion:

Basically, the guild should work exactly the way it does now, with two changes:

First, a freeze on payoffs for a number of RL hours to be decided by the developers. Also up to the developers: whether the hours scale with the sum of the bounty, and whether the hours are counted when the PC is offline. I'm undecided on these questions and would like to hear more input from other people reading this.

Second, and important: the PC does not get notified that they are being targeted until after the freeze has expired.

This gives a slight starting advantage to the guild, in that it gives them a chance to get the drop on the target. If the assassin fails, then the upper hand shifts to the target, who is now alerted to their status as a target.

The current PvP rule pertaining to assassins would still apply: they can interact with a target and then have 24 hours where they can ambush them. Of course, it would probably not be prudent to do so, but that's for the assassin to worry about.

I think this is a reasonable solution. It creates an incentive for people to hire the guild, and conversely, it creates a disincentive if the guild members fail to do their job well.

I like this idea in theory - How do you feel about my desire to have the knife be droppable and usable by the target on the assassin's corpse to nullify the contract? I think this adds a level of tension that's currently one-way between the assassin and the target (if the assassin(s) plans poorly and loses, they stand to lose the contract for the entire guild, which means they can't come back and try again later to recoup their losses unless someone rehires the guild).

I don't see it as quite so heinous a consequence as losing a settlement leadership, but I see it as noteworthy enough to have the side-effect of incentivizing assassins working in cells to ensure that it doesn't happen, which is a positive for me, atmospherically speaking. It also makes sense to me, from an IC perspective, that the guild officials would not want failure to lead to ousting, and that contracts that work out poorly might be forcibly passed off as a hot potato.

I'd also argue that giving the counter-play option could make it unnecessary for a notification at all, until the death screen - where the combat log should inform you upon death to someone carrying the knife that you were slain by an assassin, followed up by being informed your bounty has been claimed when they actually use the knife on you.

I'd keep the must RP within 24 hours rule for engagement, though - there should still be some level of interaction, even if it isn't obvious or hostile.

[Dr. B]

Depends on the implementation. There's the fact that the target could just run off with the knife, so there'd need to be a way to return it to the assassin's inventory (could be done through a script).

But, more important: assassins often attack in groups, and the target could kill one assassin (for example, a lowbie who is with the group) and use the knife, even though the other assassins survived. That seems to me to be an issue.

[satan]

Having given this more thought, I'm going to throw out an amended suggestion:

Basically, the guild should work exactly the way it does now, with two changes:

First, a freeze on payoffs for a number of RL hours to be decided by the developers. Also up to the developers: whether the hours scale with the sum of the bounty, and whether the hours are counted when the PC is offline. I'm undecided on these questions and would like to hear more input from other people reading this.

Second, and important: the PC does not get notified that they are being targeted until after the freeze has expired.

This gives a slight starting advantage to the guild, in that it gives them a chance to get the drop on the target. If the assassin fails, then the upper hand shifts to the target, who is now alerted to their status as a target.

The current PvP rule pertaining to assassins would still apply: they can interact with a target and then have 24 hours where they can ambush them. Of course, it would probably not be prudent to do so, but that's for the assassin to worry about.

I think this is a reasonable solution. It creates an incentive for people to hire the guild, and conversely, it creates a disincentive if the guild members fail to do their job well.

I like this idea in theory - How do you feel about my desire to have the knife be droppable and usable by the target on the assassin's corpse to nullify the contract? I think this adds a level of tension that's currently one-way between the assassin and the target (if the assassin(s) plans poorly and loses, they stand to lose the contract for the entire guild, which means they can't come back and try again later to recoup their losses unless someone rehires the guild).

I don't see it as quite so heinous a consequence as losing a settlement leadership, but I see it as noteworthy enough to have the side-effect of incentivizing assassins working in cells to ensure that it doesn't happen, which is a positive for me, atmospherically speaking. It also makes sense to me, from an IC perspective, that the guild officials would not want failure to lead to ousting, and that contracts that work out poorly might be forcibly passed off as a hot potato.

I'd also argue that giving the counter-play option could make it unnecessary for a notification at all, until the death screen - where the combat log should inform you upon death to someone carrying the knife that you were slain by an assassin, followed up by being informed your bounty has been claimed when they actually use the knife on you.

I'd keep the must RP within 24 hours rule for engagement, though - there should still be some level of interaction, even if it isn't obvious or hostile.

Say you hire the cable company to hook up your internet.

They send a guy, who messes up the job and leaves without your internet working.

You get billed. Job complete, pay up sucka.

Would you be satisfied with that?

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

Say you hire the cable company to hook up your internet.

They send a guy, who messes up the job and leaves without your internet working.

You get billed. Job complete, pay up sucka.

Would you be satisfied with that?

While I see your point, I think I can best sum up where I disagree with your premise by changing your analogy a bit to be more appropriate to the circumstances, IMO.

Say you walk into a shady neighborhood and approach a guy on a bicycle, asking to buy some drugs (an illicit/illegal service, much like assassination of government officials). They give you the price, you fork over the cash, and they laugh and tell you to have a nice day.

Would you be satisfied? No. Is this a completely reasonable possibility to expect when dealing with such shady people? Yes. (Although if you live through the experience, it is likely to damage the dealer's/assassin's reputation, so they have their own reasons for not wanting this to happen too often).

However, your point is understood, and my response to that point in question is that doesn't this just further encourage the client to attempt to meet with/have interactive RP with the assassin, to make sure they're actually good at their job and that they're not going to lose the money?

Do you see this as any less reasonable than logging in and being told you can lose government leadership because someone threw a million gold at your name on a bulletin board?

[Nobs]

Its not fun to trow money at a npc and have no rp.
It is fun to rp with a assassin to make that murder plot and then trow money at the assassin so he can do his job.

[Dr. B]

Put a special message board inside the assassin's guild. Writing papers used on the door to the guild appear on this board. This can be used to arrange meetings, if a person wants to.

[BHR55]

What if the money you put up for a bounty is not collected right away by the NPC(maybe a small % as your non refundable deposit, maybe 10 instead of the current 25).

Then in order to pay off the guild the target has to pay double the bounty, With most of the coin going to the Assassin not the guild. Combine this with a requirement of having an assassin present for the pay off to vouch to the Guild or something along those lines. This way the target has a chance to negotiate for their life with the Assassin that took the job, instead of just running to the guild and paying it off no string attached.

Combine this with a temporary blacklist that prevents an assassin who took a payoff from taking contracts for time, or for x number of missed contracts. This gives some consequence so even if you use an OOC friend(yes nobody would do this) to pay off your bounty they can't help you again for a while.

Lastly, in the event that a contract is completed the character who put it up is on the hook to come in and pay within x game or RL days. If the player fails to pay the Guild, (they went broke, didn't have the money in the first place, think they can get away with it) then their own name automatically goes on the board for double the bounty they had on offer. Same rules apply for payoff(double of nothing x4 of the original now) and you are blacklisted from putting up more contracts for a time. Might need to add something to make sure the assassin gets paid a 50% of the contract they completed from the guild coffers. In the event that this happens so they are no one is empty handed. The deposits should keep the guild solvent, and if killed the buyer in default should get the money taken from their account.

I think something like this would keep the existing system as is with a bit of back and forth potential, and nobody has to front money for jobs that never get done.

[Dreams]

Assuming that mechanics and the guild remain the way they are right now, here are some things that could happen IG to change things:

- Advertising / Sales:
There are many ways to advertise your services. An assassin from the guild might be able to reach out to parties who are likely to want assassinations to take place. Perhaps they could offer incentives such as money-back on your first order, for a limited period. Think about why people want assassins and tap into that. Perhaps they want someone out of office, perhaps they want revenge, perhaps they simply have the money and absolutely hate so-and-so.

- Proactive Assassinations:
Similar to above, but individual assassins should take a proactive approach about encouraging assassinations. Maybe you're the type of assassin who does jobs on the side, away from the guild? Maybe you're a loyal assassin to the guild and encourage people to put their money right into the guild coffers? Maybe a bit of both, asking people for a bit of a bonus if the assassination is done in a particular way?

- Organisation:
Assassins could seek each other out to try and work on the above points together. If you can get a little group of assassins together, even 3-4 would be enough to make it very much worthwhile. Knowledge of that group leaking IC is great, because it can build up a dangerous reputation. Organised crime is better crime. This is one of those cases!

- Reputation:
Create a reputation for the guild. It may not have the right reputation IC yet. Perhaps assassins could start bullying people into using their services, or they could try and drive the 'We always succeed' attitude. Think about ways it could work within the current parameters of the system, because whilst we can argue here for changes, it's going to be more fun just to try and work with what you have for the moment.

[Dr. B]

What do you think are the odds that people in the guild are already doing all of these things?

I mean, no offense, honestly, but it's just a bit of a pet peeve when people not playing in the guild make these suggestions, especially "RP in groups"--the people in the guild would have to be remarkably dense for these ideas to have never occurred to us and to not be already doing them.

[Diegovog]

What if the money you put up for a bounty is not collected right away by the NPC(maybe a small % as your non refundable deposit, maybe 10 instead of the current 25).

Then in order to pay off the guild the target has to pay double the bounty, With most of the coin going to the Assassin not the guild. Combine this with a requirement of having an assassin present for the pay off to vouch to the Guild or something along those lines. This way the target has a chance to negotiate for their life with the Assassin that took the job, instead of just running to the guild and paying it off no string attached.

Combine this with a temporary blacklist that prevents an assassin who took a payoff from taking contracts for time, or for x number of missed contracts. This gives some consequence so even if you use an OOC friend(yes nobody would do this) to pay off your bounty they can't help you again for a while.

Lastly, in the event that a contract is completed the character who put it up is on the hook to come in and pay within x game or RL days. If the player fails to pay the Guild, (they went broke, didn't have the money in the first place, think they can get away with it) then their own name automatically goes on the board for double the bounty they had on offer. Same rules apply for payoff(double of nothing x4 of the original now) and you are blacklisted from putting up more contracts for a time. Might need to add something to make sure the assassin gets paid a 50% of the contract they completed from the guild coffers. In the event that this happens so they are no one is empty handed. The deposits should keep the guild solvent, and if killed the buyer in default should get the money taken from their account.

I think something like this would keep the existing system as is with a bit of back and forth potential, and nobody has to front money for jobs that never get done.

I like these.
But the idea of paying the Guild after can be exploited. Character A puts a bounty on easy character B for 1million gold coins so that his assassin friend C can easily collect it. Character A purposely fails to pay the promised bounty because he doesn't care about dieing and it ends up being yet another opportunity for his friend assassin C to profit even more. Even it isn't C who collects, he managed to make his friend wealthy without spending a single gold coin.
It doesn't even have to be for a friend. I feel people who dislike other characters would do this just to get someone dead and wouldn't care about their own assassination later on.

[BHR55]

. . .
I think something like this would keep the existing system as is with a bit of back and forth potential, and nobody has to front money for jobs that never get done.

I like these.
But the idea of paying the Guild after can be exploited. Character A puts a bounty on easy character B for 1million gold coins so that his assassin friend C can easily collect it. Character A purposely fails to pay the promised bounty because he doesn't care about dieing and it ends up being yet another opportunity for his friend assassin C to profit even more. Even it isn't C who collects, he managed to make his friend wealthy without spending a single gold coin.
It doesn't even have to be for a friend. I feel people who dislike other characters would do this just to get someone dead and wouldn't care about their own assassination later on.

A valid concern, but in this scenario I expect the money to be taken from the slain characters bank account (or implement debt collection taking x% of coin they put in the bank every time until it is paid off as a consequence for doing what they did). A few other checks like a minimum level to put forth a contract, and deny any reward from rolling a character with guild debt are possible checks that could be used to discourage this sort of exploiting. I imagine others can come up with other possibly better validators to alert DM's to this sort of practice as well.

A larger deposit could be required up front as well as a % of the total you put forward, with the $ refunded to you if it is paid off. When I suggested this I was thinking in terms of a general framework, not exact nitty gritty.

[Dr. B]

A valid concern, but in this scenario I expect the money to be taken from the slain characters bank account (or implement debt collection taking x% of coin they put in the bank every time until it is paid off as a consequence for doing what they did).

This sounds like it could be kind of frustrating. In cases where the bounty is very large, many characters are likely to roll long before even a small portion has been paid off.

I would be in favor of a system where the character's bank account simply drops below -1000 GP in cases where they have to pay for an assassination and don't have the funds. Naturally they can't withdraw anything from the bank until they get above -1000 GP.

This could easily be rationalized in-universe as an arrangement between the Assassin's Guild and the banking system, like immunity to hits in exchange for compensating the guild when the client is a deadbeat.

[Nitro]

Putting debt on an assassin for failing high-value contract would make them extremely unattractive to assassins.

[Dr. B]

I'm not sure if that was a response to my post or something else that was said, but the debt would be on the client who didn't have the fund to pay for the assassination.

Also, these ideas are starting to become very convoluted. They have too many moving parts, would take too long to implement (and therefore probably end up on the backburner) and are likely to have a lot of bugs. For that reason I highly suggest Irongron consider my earlier suggestions: put a freeze on payoffs where the target is not notified of the bounty on their head, and a script that allows notes posted to the assassin's guild door to appear on a special message board inside the guild. The former gives people more of an incentive to place contracts, which gives the guildmembers something to do and encourages them to collaborate with each other. The latter gives them a way to communicate with the guild.