Quote:

Original post by GroZZleR Online games are about checks and balances. PlayerA can't kill PlayerB with an instant-cast instant-kill spell because that would be unfair.

I agree that's why the game would need a system such as this. So players can't go around killing innocents without penalty. The bounty system would be a part of the checks and balances.

Quote:

Original post by GroZZleR The killer gives up town life and becomes an outcast. He manually tracks down and kills his prey unassisted and gets some loot to live off of. For this, he's rewarded by having his position broadcasted to every wanna-be bounty hunter in the land... oh, and a massive gold debt when he's (eventually) brought down.

Pretty much. Except that one kill won't give the full bounty on his head. It will be only a portion of the bounty unless the bounty is under a certain amount. The gold debt added will be equal to the bounty amount disbursed. I'm still working on perfecting the formula.

Quote:

Original post by GroZZleR What happens to the bounty hunter if he fails? Does he get the debt instead? Where's the balance? You're only punishing one side.

Well the bounty hunter will be dead and the criminal will be able to loot the corpse. The criminal will be taxed accordingly if he has a gold debt. Also the bounty hunter has no need to be punished anymore than a cop would need to be punished for pursuing a criminal in real life.

The biggest problem I see is this: Why do you have PKing in your game?

Really, why? In your game, what are the acceptable forms of PKing besides bounty hunting? If there aren't any, then it just seems better to not allow it.

If there are some, then how do you prevent someone from putting a bounty on someone after being rightfully PKed? If you can prevent the bounty, why doesn't your system just stop it before it can happen? (e.g. see games where you can kill outside, but not within, your faction) If you can't prevent it, then there are two options. One, your system is effective and it stops even proper forms of PKing, at which point why do you even include the ability to PK? Two, your system is not effective, so why include the bounty system?

Quote:

Original post by Way Walker The biggest problem I see is this: Why do you have PKing in your game? Really, why? In your game, what are the acceptable forms of PKing besides bounty hunting? If there aren't any, then it just seems better to not allow it. If there are some, then how do you prevent someone from putting a bounty on someone after being rightfully PKed? If you can prevent the bounty, why doesn't your system just stop it before it can happen? (e.g. see games where you can kill outside, but not within, your faction) If you can't prevent it, then there are two options. One, your system is effective and it stops even proper forms of PKing, at which point why do you even include the ability to PK? Two, your system is not effective, so why include the bounty system?

Besides bounty hunting I would say clan wars, factions, dueling areas etc. Meaning if you kill someone from an opposing faction they can't place a bounty. I don't want the system to outright stop PKing. I want people to have the option to play a cold blooded killer. I just don't want them to be a murderer without suffering a consequence. Some games have stat or skill loss for PKs which most people don't like and I don't feel is fair. I think a gold loss is much more fair.

Quote:

by RobotechII I guess I didn't make it clear in my first post. If you place a bounty on the persons head the gold will be deducted (or possibly held in escrow until it's collected) from your bank account. So it's doubtful a level 1 character would have enough gold to place a meaningful bounty on anyone. Although harassment should be taken care of by GMs.

but doesn't PKers mostly target the level 1 players? If the level 1 players can't really hurt the PKers then the bounty system does not protect them (noobs).

How about the victims can file a complaint against a player and the system sets a bounty in relation to the number of complaints and level of the victims, etc.

A wanted man will have game restrictions such as being attacked on sight by npc guards, can't buy from shops (only player warez), can't heal at an inn, etc.

Wanted players can lower their bounty or remove it by killing other PKer's. In effect, make the PKers the bounty hunters. Of course normal players can become bounty hunters as well, just to get the experience and bounty. If a Pker-turned-bounty hunter gets some gold through trade or drops, the gold is automatically used to deduct his bounty. he can only sell items at special stores to limit the amount of money he can make. hopefully the Pkers will be busy killing each other to bother with the other players.

Quote:

Original post by yapposai but doesn't PKers mostly target the level 1 players? If the level 1 players can't really hurt the PKers then the bounty system does not protect them (noobs).

Quote:

Myself A slight problem would be people killing newbs. But there could always be an automatic bounty placed on anyone killing someone below so many levels beyond themselves.

I guess I contradicted myself earlier. Any harassers should be reported to GMs.

Quote:

yapposai How about the victims can file a complaint against a player and the system sets a bounty in relation to the number of complaints and level of the victims, etc.

Sounds promising. Will toy with that idea to see what might work best.

Quote:

yapposai A wanted man will have game restrictions such as being attacked on sight by npc guards, can't buy from shops (only player warez), can't heal at an inn, etc.

I had that in mind too :)

Quote:

yapposai Wanted players can lower their bounty or remove it by killing other PKer's. In effect, make the PKers the bounty hunters. Of course normal players can become bounty hunters as well, just to get the experience and bounty. If a Pker-turned-bounty hunter gets some gold through trade or drops, the gold is automatically used to deduct his bounty. he can only sell items at special stores to limit the amount of money he can make. hopefully the Pkers will be busy killing each other to bother with the other players.

The only problem with that is say that two or more murderers conspire with each other allowing murdererA to kill murdererB, murdererA collects bounty then allows murdererB to kill murdererA and then murdererB collects bounty from murdererA. They would then have gotten rid of a portion of their Gold Debt (only a portion because no large bounty is given with just one kill).

Quote:

Original post by RobotechII The system should automatically cut all gold intake in half whether looted from a corpse or off the ground. The system could also be implemented that any gold dropped on the ground will be taxed even if it's the second time the gold is being taxed.

Okay, thanks for the clarification.

Now, I'm not an MMO player, so I may be off the mark here, but I still think you're going through extraordinary lengths to first provide the player with the ability to do something then artificially hendering them from doing it. I don't understand this.

Consider: Is this illegal PKing supposed to be fun? If the best of the best become successful at being bandits who slaughter both newbies, regular players and bounty hunters alike, will you consider this a failed outcome or exactly how the game world is supposed to be? I, for instance, would find it fascinating to try to survive a system where everyone's hunting me, but I'd probably try to play a great bandit. However, there's nothing stopping a jerk or snob from taking on this role without adding any of the flavor or community-building aspect (as "the man everyone loves to hate" for instance)

Why I keep coming back to this is that it seems to me that a fundamental principle of design of any game is that you should never allow players to do something that will ultimately end up being boring. I'd recommend that you either define the role of what a bandit is supposed to be and make allowances in your game mechanics for that (as you're doing with dueling), or (if it's ultimately going to be a hollow path) eliminate the possibility before players waste lots of time discovering that it's not what they're supposed to be doing anyway.

The system looks good, but it seems like it favors higher levels of players who have the cash to pay large bounties. n00bz0rZ who are lacking in cash, and are perhaps most vulnerable to rampant PKing will be less likely to get their revenge because they can't pay the big bucks. Perhaps for these players, the government can add an additional percentage (say, 25% of the original bounty) of cash to the bounty. Once the player has obtained a certain amount of cash, this benefit no longer applies.

Possible exploit: Character B could just put a bounty on Character A, who is a friend of Character B. Then, Character C, who is an alt of Character B, could come along and kill Character A, collect the bounty, and send the bounty back to Character B. Character B would then end up with the money he/she started woith, plus 25%.
Wash, rinse, repeat.

Possible solution: The government would only give you the 25% bonus a certain amount of times before it becomes void.
Not to mention Character B's bounty cant be big enough to be worth spending a long time just for the 25% bonus.

Quote:

Original post by RobotechII The only problem with that is say that two or more murderers conspire with each other allowing murdererA to kill murdererB, murdererA collects bounty then allows murdererB to kill murdererA and then murdererB collects bounty from murdererA. They would then have gotten rid ojhven with just one kill).

But MurdererA and MurdererB should both have bounty hunter licenses. If a bounty hunter kills another bounty hunter then the killer automatically reverts back to PKer status with harsher penalties and bounty. he does not get the bounty reward


The lower bounty Pkers would probably gang up on a high bounty Pker to
get the cash needed to clear their small bounties. The high bounty player would probably need to kill a lot of small PKers to remove his own bounty.


lets say a Pker who dies losses half total experience and all gold. A Pker-turned bounty hunter will not suffer this consequence. The heavier death penalty gives incentive to Pkers to become bounty hunters and clear their bounty. A Pker who continues to PK (non bounty hunters) risk losing a lot when they die.

I wouldn't want to be killed over and over again just to pay of another PKer's bounty. I would rather kill other Pkers than team up with with another Pker and keep getting killed.

edit: a Pker killing a bounty hunter is considered self defence and will not affect their bounty. This gives incentive to the Pker to kill only bounty hunters which are considered safe for killing.

Quote:

Original post by Wavinator Consider: Is this illegal PKing supposed to be fun? If the best of the best become successful at being bandits who slaughter both newbies, regular players and bounty hunters alike, will you consider this a failed outcome or exactly how the game world is supposed to be? I, for instance, would find it fascinating to try to survive a system where everyone's hunting me, but I'd probably try to play a great bandit. However, there's nothing stopping a jerk or snob from taking on this role without adding any of the flavor or community-building aspect (as "the man everyone loves to hate" for instance)

I would like for it to be fun. I want to make it restrictive enough to stop rampant PKing but not so restrictive that it would ruin the fun for the people who want to be a bandit. I would find it how the game world is supposed to be.

Quote:

Wavinator Why I keep coming back to this is that it seems to me that a fundamental principle of design of any game is that you should never allow players to do something that will ultimately end up being boring. I'd recommend that you either define the role of what a bandit is supposed to be and make allowances in your game mechanics for that (as you're doing with dueling), or (if it's ultimately going to be a hollow path) eliminate the possibility before players waste lots of time discovering that it's not what they're supposed to be doing anyway.

I'm trying to come up with a good method to keep it from being a hollow path. I've thought about adding some kind of bonuses or special priviledges for the criminals with the highest bounty so the system will be rewarding to the criminals.

PS. I enjoy reading your journal. I wish you the best of luck on Straylight.

Quote:

Original post by Ultimaking Possible exploit: Character B could just put a bounty on Character A, who is a friend of Character B. Then, Character C, who is an alt of Character B, could come along and kill Character A, collect the bounty, and send the bounty back to Character B. Character B would then end up with the money he/she started woith, plus 25%. Wash, rinse, repeat.

I thought about that too. The solution I was thinking of is adding a small amount to the bounty for the newb, let's say 500 gold. But to hurt the newb killer we should give him a bigger Gold Debt for that newb kill. So the killer kills the newb his bounty is for 500 gold but when someone collects on his bounty the killer's gold debt will be 3000 gold.