Is Open Lock/Disable Trap basically redundant? Or am I mistaken

[Nitro]

Slight derail, but why are you writing in that eye-searing teal colour instead of the default neutral tone that looks fine on both PC and mobile readers?

[Nodders]

...because I hate the gray-on-gray-on-gray forum theme. Is it really that bad?

[The GrumpyCat]

So, this is obviously a hot issue and one close to many, many peoples' hearts... and as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, I think there's a pretty decent solution for people that want to play types of characters that do that.

NPC housing that can be burgled. It'd require overhauling to a mild degree of several cities to fit in appropriate and varied levels of housing (poor, middle class, wealthy), but it'd give such characters an outlet and a way to make money. Naturally, you'd want systems to go along with this - so, maybe it could be a similar thing to the seafaring update? Whenever you -burgle a home (potentially after finding an appropriate window or just going for the front door), it teleports you to a unique instance. Could be that you broke into a wizard's home and he has some very powerful protection, and you realize you dun goof'd. Or maybe you break into a wizard's home and he just keeps valuables laying all over and no protection, trusting the guard? Hell. Luck of Heroes feat could play in for people that take it at level 1 to give a better chance of picking a good house.

All I'm saying is, since I'm turning this into a more thought-out system than I cared to, is there's a way to incorporate NPCs into this to let people get their theft fantasies.

I like that colour actually. It's pretty. You have inspired me.


So there are already npc houses you can burgle if you want, that's already there. Not many, but a few.

But I don't think this entirely itches the scratch that people are asking for.

There is some truth when people talk about stealing being a pvp action, (and this is why I'm against chests being easily accessable as I said, so please don't bite my head off for this).

The above is like saying 'PvP can be griefed, it's griefed all the time. So let's just remove all PvP. We have npcs to fight and that's exactly the same right?'

The thing is it isn't. You don't get the same level of - ironically - interaction. And a good theft (which I agree can be few and far between) carries the weight of story, or at least the hope that you have definatly effected another character - for good for for ill.

Steal 10 gold off an npc, the npc won't care. Won't react. Won't talk about it. Won't make any difference.

Steal 10 gold off a pc and that pc may indeed make comment, make reacion, carry weight with your action, and people like that. People like having a mechanical effect on other players, even if it's just minor.

That's not to say that I don't think the npc thing isn't a good idea. It really is - and as I said it is already implemented in some places. But I do also see the desire for pcs to be able to break in to, and yes even steal, from other pcs.

Really when looking at these sort of things we have to ask ourselves questions such as

*How much damage could this cause?
*How likely is it to be abused?
*If it can be abused, how easy is it to prevent abuse?

[the grim yeeter]

Can we please stop with the terrible, blinding colours? It actually hurts to read. Thanks.

The above is like saying 'PvP can be griefed, it's griefed all the time. So let's just remove all PvP. We have npcs to fight and that's exactly the same right?'

No. That's not at all what was being said.

Please, how many times does it have to be repeated? What people are saying is: currently, all forms of PvP require face-to-face interaction and roleplay except for quarter theft, fixture theft and fixture destruction.

The thing is it isn't. You don't get the same level of - ironically - interaction.

But what we keep saying is that there is no (required) interaction (and interaction very often simply does not take place at all).

Steal 10 gold off an npc, the npc won't care. Won't react. Won't talk about it. Won't make any difference.

Well, then we make that NPC care and react. Surely we can think of ways?

Steal 10 gold off a pc and that pc may indeed make comment, make reacion, carry weight with your action, and people like that. People like having a mechanical effect on other players, even if it's just minor.

Typically on Arelith, pickpockets are answered with getting murdered. And I base this on a decade-and-a-half years of experience on Arelith.

But I do also see the desire for pcs to be able to break in to, and yes even steal, from other pcs.

It's not like people in here don't want this to be possible. They just want it to be mandatorily interactive like all the rest of the forms of PvP on Arelith. And it currently is not.

*How much damage could this cause?

Haven't the shared experiences and views of players in this thread already illustrated this enough? It causes damage in the form of demotivating players, being annoyed with other players, having to spend hours rewriting those messages of a stolen message board, and so on.

*How likely is it to be abused?

The thing is, as multiple people in here said already: the problem is not in the abuse of the system. No, the problem is the system itself. The fact that players can, without required interactive roleplay, steal one item/fixture per twenty-four hours from a player's quarter, is the entire problem. See the library example described by Scurvy Cur:

My most recent experience with a widescale destruction of furniture within a quarter was the complete annihilation of a player library by thieves, who just binned the bookshelves 1/day until the library was gone, so near as I could tell, out of nothing but spite for the character who had assembled the library in question. The player who made the library reported it, but was informed that no rules were broken since no more than 1/day got taken.

*If it can be abused, how easy is it to prevent abuse?

The usual answer to this is "report abuse". But, like Scurvy Cur said:

In this light, I'm not particularly reassured that griefing that does not break any rules will be addressed (or put another way, I've been here too long to believe that the "be nice" rule has any meaningful teeth as a deterrent to griefers).

What typically happens with a system that can be used to grief players, and a "just trust"/honor system plus DM reports to deal with griefers, is:
- people are going to get griefed
- these people will report to the DM team
- these people will have no idea whether the griefer has actually been punished or not (and therefore will lose faith in the reporting system)
- and even if the griefer is punished or banned at some point, still none of the stuff will be returned to the victim. The police may catch the thief, but not until after you've already been robbed.

And like I said earlier:

Yes, sure, but reporting isn't fun. People don't play a game to have to report fellow players for displaying questionable and/or poor behaviour. If a system can be improved such that it becomes more griefer-proof, it should in most (if not all) cases, especially when no roleplay was being had in the original system at all anyway (and by now, a good number of players have mentioned in this thread that they have, indeed, gained zero roleplay from all the times they have been the victim of quarter-looting and/or break-ins).

[Nodders]

Hot take, but...

I don't think a lot of people want to make meaningful RP when it comes to theft. They want a payout.

At the same time, when a PC invests in a home and puts effort into it, they expect a bit of sanctity to come with such a thing - so it's not unreasonable (at all) for PCs to not want people coming in for... any reason, be it theft of a stack of adamantine, or 'for the lulz' of moving furniture.

You can slice it any way you want, but ultimately, there's never any real meaningful RP generated from theft that has no interaction whatsoever.

There's not. There's literally zero interaction.

That's not fun for the person being robbed. Maybe the person looting their home gets a kick out of it, but... yeah.

I dunno, man. That's just my hot take.

[The GrumpyCat]

My above post was meant to simply explain why I do not feel that replacing all possiblity of PC theft with NPC theft is the same.

I am taking your concerns on board. I think I've mentioned such already. You'll note I didn't actually answer the three questions I put with my own answers - merely put them out there to be remembered.

Possibly one answer then, is to make stealing fixtures in other peoples quarters illegal- unless with the permission/supervision of a DM. Though again - I would only suggest putting in such a ruling if quarters could be more possible to enter in the first place.

[-XXX-]

Honestly, I've considered many times before to just make my character's quarter public access. I like playing with fixtures and like sharing them with others first and foremost.

Pretty much the only reason that stopped me every. single. time. is the fact that vandalizing a quarter with 0 RP and/or interaction is permissible.
I always try to be as generous as possible with access for other characters, but feel reluctant to grant unmoderated access to just anyone for the above (and solely because of the above) reason.

That reasoning only solidifies once I share a quarter with someone else and when they make their own player-made additions.

[Ork]

Roleplay behind quarters needs to be fixed. There needs to be risk. The DC 127 is too prohibitive to conduct fun espionage missions or assassinations or home invasions. If removing chest looting gets us to lower quarter DCs, I'm behind it 100%.

[Nodders]

Perhaps it could be experimented with to make it easier to break in, but have fixtures/chests untouchable?

[Skibbles]

It could swing wildly the other way if doors are easily passed. If big groups just get a lock picker on board you could be looking at a sharp rise of low to mid investment B&E 12v1 murder.

Maybe if only the picker could pass through, and not just open any door for his army of buddies, but then it seems silly and not immersive.

Seems to be a complicated solution no matter what is chosen (if any), and I'm not sure how I feel about any changes one way or another.

I'd kind of hate to have to be constantly fully warded even inside a quarter having a chat just because there's a considerable risk of half a dozen people gate crashing your door.

[The GrumpyCat]

Chatting to a friend on discord about this, and had a random idea, which they said I should throw out as an idea (Please note, this is aside from the chest/fixture issue...)

What if characters had a command -Case. Where basicaly when you enter a quarter/guildhouse you 'case the joint.' As in looked around for enterences/exits ect. This goes off your spot and/or search, and process could take say, one minute. If you move during that minute the casing stops. The DC to pick the lock/disarm the traps on the door is then lowered by that amount for the character (possibly though only for a limited period? Like one IG day say)

The Plus Side: It would mean an increased chance of rp before any thievery, as presumably the thief would have to be let in - and the timing issue means that even just barging in after you wouldn't work - unless you're happy to let the inteloper just stand there for a RL min.

The Negative Side: It might make people a lot more leery about who they let into their home in the first place.
And of course this isn't taking into acount things like stealing from chests/fixtures ect.. which is a bit more problematic.

[the grim yeeter]

I'd really only like that if one could then also make a spot check to detect someone is 'casing the joint'. In other words, the casing should be counterable.

The issue with this idea, though, is that it does not solve the problem of not having to interact/roleplay with anyone. You could still just case a place without anyone around you (meaning people could, and still will, check the playerlist to see whether the house owner is online or not, before using -case and then breaking in).

[The GrumpyCat]

Uh, if you'll read what I typed, you have to be /inside/ the home. So presumably someone has to let you in?

And you'll note that it has a timer on it - so that someone can't (easily) just slip in behind you for two seconds, type -case and leave. They have to stick around for a minute.

So, unless your pc is in the habit of randomly letting anyone without any rp at all into their home, the chances are pretty good some sort of rp would happen before hand.

Further more - esp if there was a timer on it, you could probably guess who the thief was by working out who you'd let into your quarter of late.

[-XXX-]

"Hm, might have invited too many people lately."
*release quarter*
*buy quarter*

[the grim yeeter]

Uh, if you'll read what I typed, you have to be /inside/ the home. So presumably someone has to let you in?

Ah. Apologies. Misread.

[Nodders]

I don't know. It's a nice idea to let a lot more people more easily break in, I guess.. but the issue is, is that's not what people want.

People want their housing to be 'secure' on an OOC level. It's their little sanctuary that they bought, paid for, worked for, et cetera. It's their own thing to do their RP with. And, to be entirely blunt, like I said earlier, I just don't see the whole B&E roleplay to be all that engaging, since it amounts to 99.9% of the time just taking the most expensive stack of gear they can.

edit: apparently e + rp being close together causes it to automatically change it to 'sexy elven fun times'

[Scurvy Cur]

The forbidden breaking and erotic roleplay.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

I don't know. It's a nice idea to let a lot more people more easily break in, I guess.. but the issue is, is that's not what people want.

People want their housing to be 'secure' on an OOC level. It's their little sanctuary that they bought, paid for, worked for, et cetera. It's their own thing to do their RP with. And, to be entirely blunt, like I said earlier, I just don't see the whole B&E roleplay to be all that engaging, since it amounts to 99.9% of the time just taking the most expensive stack of gear they can.

edit: apparently e + rp being close together causes it to automatically change it to 'sexy elven fun times'

There's a dissonance because quarters, of all things on Arelith, are the most secure and impregnable places.

Nothing should be "secure" on an OOC level. Nothing should be guaranteed or safe or continuous. The people who complain about the potential of having their quarter suddenly being vulnerable are the same that get upset when other updates suddenly change their RP and they think the sky is falling (see Animal Language).

I'm a firm believer that roleplaying should, on some level, be an uncomfortable experience. You are in a shared narrative. This is not a book, this is a play, and shit happens all the time on stage. This is not an MMORPG that hinges on gameplay systems providing a safe and reliable experience. This is 20 whackos getting on stage, drugged with lore and contrasting convictions, and being told by a handful of DM-directors waaaay back in the auditorium to just "do something entertaining."

Circling back, every tick (6 minutes), lowers the DC of Open Lock in quarters by X amount. Put more emphasis on traps. Put a cap on how much it can be lowered by. Incentivize break-ins when there are people actually there, so you force a conflict, rather than allow for fixture theft to occur.

[ReverentBlade]

violently breaking and entering a home is barely pg-13 tbh.

[Nobs]

violently breaking and entering a home is barely pg-13 tbh.

I seen a npc whore in Cordor.
We can kill and cut of heads from other players.
Some of the sound sets like the manor with the lich in minmir have voices 'begging for it to stop'.
Torture is a thing that happens aswel.

Breaking and entering for theft seems rather minor to me.

But here on Arelith items and messageboards are worth more then life it self

[ReverentBlade]

Yeah, we should deal with all that too

[-XXX-]

violently breaking and entering a home is barely pg-13 tbh.

Violently breaking and entering a dragon's home in order to steal their hoard is pretty much the fundamental premise of D&D!

[Ork]

I'm convinced y'all don't know what PG-13 is. It's a bad metric & bad definition of what's allowed in this game.

[The GrumpyCat]

violently breaking and entering a home is barely pg-13 tbh.

As others have said, and as I shall affirm, breaking and entering is VERY much PG13 or under. There is nothing over rated about that at all.

And yeah, PG13 is a terrible metric, but it's what we have.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

If everyone hasn't figured out that PG-13 is just a way of ensuring Arelith stays clean of all exploitative behaviour (sex, torture, etc.), then let this be your PSA.

It's a bad argument to go after PG13 yet again.

Circling back - lower lock DCs when people spend time in quarters.