Criminal responsibilities

[SPXios]

I'd like to address the Jail System from a different point of view and so am doing so in another thread. This isn't to say there is anything wrong with some of the propsals in the Jail System thread or that some of them might not be implimented. But what I'd like to address here is a different aspect to that issue.

I won't go into great detail about different types of criminals. You should know how there are different types. The violent newlies looking for attention. The career criminals that are either loners (Victor) or part of a larger organization (CnR, Crimson Sashes, etc). Thugs in the employ of some IB power.

It's to some of those career criminals and their responsibilities that this thread will hopefully address.

Now the discouragement people seem to be talking about is a lacking of RPing and plots for those that spend extended time in the dungeon. Some of which should be address by plotters and VPs. Not the point of this thread.

Viceran mentioned the idea of a VP that is made for the dungeons. While some NPCs do exist some aren't cast and they haven't probably been doing this as well as they can. Available man power for staffing criminal NPCs isn't my main focus here.

As Viceran said, "It basically all comes down to man power. Not having enough people to entertain everyone." But one of the major powers of this medium is it's players. If we have say 20 criminals at one time, that's 20 characters from which can come the manpower for plots and gaol entertainment.

So what prevents the PC criminal from entertaining in the dungeon?


I consider it the responsibility of a criminal (lone or organization) that has a key to the gaol to be filling this role. A criminal with that key has the ability to go down and check out who are the up and commers interested in criminal activity.

Let's take our recent professional assassin. He get's hired to take someone out. Yet doing so himself puts him one step closer to permanent residence in the dungeon. That shouldn't be completely undesirable but never hurts to try to prevent it for as long as possible. So with a key, he goes down a couple times a week and checks on who has been arrested. A bit of RPing to find out about the person. Which could become thugs that do the killing for him. Take in the new criminal and tell them that once released you will contact them again. Upon their release you can supply them with a dagger and a bit of training. Maybe some other criminal props as you might have available as pay for past assassinations. Then you contact them again with their mission.

Yes, they will likely be caught and punished but once arrested you can go down and RP with them some more. Reassure them when they did a good job and tell them what rewards are waiting for them once they have served their time.


What you would not want to be doing is letting them out of the gaol when you go and visit. You're trip is to make contacts and build power by getting people under you. You want to attract as little attention as possible from the law. If you are releasing people and then sending them off to commit more crimes then you make their punishment be greater (since escape is added to charges) and the more often you do so, the more likely the locks will be changed and your source for new blood will but greatly cut.

And actually, were I to have a criminal that had that key, I might not worry too much about what the law would do to me. I could fairly estimate what that would be and could decide if it was worth it. It would be what those organizations more powerful than me (CnR, Red Sashes, etc) would do when I messed up their sweet deal for recruitment.


In summary, what I'm talking about should be a standard recruitment scene for the criminal characters. Just as a duelist wanna-be might spar some with the older duelists, or a squire wanna-be might spar with a knight they wished service with. A new criminal might get arrested and try to build noteriety enough to gain the notice of those criminals with more influence than myself.


As always, I could be wrong. Perhaps those that play criminals have no responsibilies and should let those that wish to follow in their footsteps have as difficult a time as they might have had. I won't discount that it might be purely the responsibility of those that enforce the law to entertain those that break it. By playing a criminal you might only need to think about yourself. I tend to not think that is true and that it is each of our responsibilities to make the areas of the game we enjoy better. People are free to disagree with me. My hope is this thread might inspire better criminals.

My guess is that the law people would enjoy taking out some agents of the CnR or a PC criminal organization more than they would enjoy taking out individual criminals that have little apparent motivation.

[Diedra]

Originally posted by SPXios
I consider it the responsibility of a criminal (lone or organization) that has a key to the gaol to be filling this role. A criminal with that key has the ability to go down and check out who are the up and commers interested in criminal activity.

Let's take our recent professional assassin. He get's hired to take someone out. Yet doing so himself puts him one step closer to permanent residence in the dungeon. That shouldn't be completely undesirable but never hurts to try to prevent it for as long as possible. So with a key, he goes down a couple times a week and checks on who has been arrested. A bit of RPing to find out about the person. Which could become thugs that do the killing for him. Take in the new criminal and tell them that once released you will contact them again. Upon their release you can supply them with a dagger and a bit of training. Maybe some other criminal props as you might have available as pay for past assassinations. Then you contact them again with their mission.

Yes, they will likely be caught and punished but once arrested you can go down and RP with them some more. Reassure them when they did a good job and tell them what rewards are waiting for them once they have served their time. I have a comment on the above. It is a nice idea to go down and recruit in the dungeons and to visit people who work for you. Workable for some things, but definitely isn't an end all solution, nor does it apply all that terribly often..

First, they won't get daily visits nor even weekly ones - sneaking into the the dungeons with stolen keys isn't an extended social call or a weekly tea. Also, the other problem is what anyone else faces also. If there isn't daily rp down there and reasons for them to log in, then the people in the prisons are probably not logged in (and in many cases don't log in their criminal char except as needed). Yes, there are ways to arrange things via PM's and emails, and sometimes that's the only way to get them on. But, just like with regular, you can often go down and find empty cells.

Second, it depends on what sort of person you are looking for and what kind of group you run. If your character is an overt criminal -- well, chances are fairly decent that you don't mind working with overt criminals that get caught easily. The other part of that is that if you are that overt criminal leader -- the chances are also good that you are sitting in jail with them, rather than leading your group on the outside. So, that leaves the people who aren't overtly criminal, and in some cases seem to be entirely opposite. Allright, so if those people work really hard to maintain that image - are they going to want people to work for them who get caught easily? Granted, even the non-obvious criminal leaders need thugs. Those are easy enough to get, if often temporary, and the leader doesn't have to even approach them themselves (and in fact probably wiser to not). Have someone else do it. The people more likely to get caught shouldn't know your name.

And on the issue of congratulating someone for their good work in jail. Erm.. well, at least in my view, I can see that as something that's a more rare consideration and only with certain exceptions of what the situation was and why they were there. I mean really... for the most part you aren't going to go down and congratulate someone for screwing up and getting caught and leaving you down one man. Now, going down and threatening them for it .... much more fun.

Anyway, while good points were made -- I don't think that's the only needed solution.

~Nicole

[Ennah]

I think it would be extremely helpful if there was a villain VP, but for law enforcement and criminal PCs.

That there be some incentive to impress someone or an organization with criminal actions would encourage better RP.

[Rosalind]

Bring in someone like Ashke to run things, like Zack's story.

Or bring back Ashke himself.

[rgendron02]

Originally posted by SPXios
My guess is that the law people would enjoy taking out some agents of the CnR or a PC criminal organization more than they would enjoy taking out individual criminals that have little apparent motivation.

Probably right, but other than the daily unmotivated crimes, there's little to grab onto. Could be simply be the result of my own ignorance, I won't deny that.

Maybe Delano? Yet that dropped off despite poking it ICly.

It just seems like the unmotivated things are most prevalent, and consequently that's what people end up RPing.

[TonyD]

Originally posted by rgendron02
It just seems like the unmotivated things are most prevalent, and consequently that's what people end up RPing.

So maybe the solution is to prepare more motivations for the criminal types? So they can work at crimes while having their own motivations, and the law enforcers can have a more exciting plot taking down a specific conspiracy.

This doesn't have to be particularly complicated.
"minions, let it be known I want all sera's out after ten bells tonight chased off, with force if need be, from the courtyard.
Any ser's let into the courtyard should be tricked into carrying one of these cursed bracelets"

Then anyone captured for violence against a sera, or handing out cursed bracelets could have some RP, where a more important player visits the prisons, or they are smuggled a silver bracelet to represent their assistance, or something. Sure, it needs (minimal) staff involvement, but could involve a lot of criminals. And also let the criminal players "do evil" as part of a plot, rather than just by doing random crimes.

If all the captured criminals are put in a cell together, they can still RP, and if the trial is rushed along (since only one set of evidence needs to be gathered), they need not spend so much time out of the game.

Can people in jail receive visits? (without needing a warden player to be logged in and available.) Can they receive (and send?) scrolls? That could also let them interact more with the world, correspond with their defence, give testimonials or cut deals with the watch, etc.

[Uwaine]

Originally posted by TonyD
So maybe the solution is to prepare more motivations for the criminal types? So they can work at crimes while having their own motivations, and the law enforcers can have a more exciting plot taking down a specific conspiracy.

Well, I'm sitting here with no end of people I want to see bumped off, but what I see is a shortage of potential ... employees. (Especially ones that have proven themselves already; how, exactly? - well, find out IC, or give it some thought yourself.)

I can offer motivation, but I see no one who'd be up for doing the job.

Criminal PCs are usually blatantly, overtly criminal characters with no other dimension, who start their crimes right after character creation. They have no background, no real IC motivation. It's very boring, and they don't ever even have an opportunity to find real motivations for three-dimensional crimes. Who's going to hire a nutcase that just runs around murdering and assaulting at random?

Now, someone like Nyar has potential, especially if he doesn't disappear entirely after his trial and sentence.

It's especially troublesome because about 2% of the criminals will ever make it into the IB, or into contact with IB dwellers, and that's where all the real power, plots, and employers are. And it's their own doing, really - criminals are mostly instant gratification characters.

If you're actually working for someone clever, with real motivations, capture and jail time become less of an issue, too. When you have a solid plan, and only commit crimes for specific purposes, you're less likely to be discovered at all; and when your patron has favor and influence, you're going to have an easier time of it when you are captured.

[Ennah]

I'm tellin' ya! A criminal VP who starts up a crime ring! A high-placed PC could try and start something similar, but there's usually too much at stake for any player to be willing.

For a low-placed PC, it'd be nigh impossible without constantly being caught (all the while trying to gain credibility).

[Priam]

Originally posted by TonyD
Can people in jail receive visits? (without needing a warden player to be logged in and available.) Can they receive (and send?) scrolls? That could also let them interact more with the world, correspond with their defence, give testimonials or cut deals with the watch, etc.

No, and no.

You have to have a Gaol, Watch, or Royal Guard member take scrolls for you (which is viewed as a very, very bad thing, mostly; at the very least, expect to have your correspondence read and examined for any hint of foul play or trickery). You need a Gaoler (and permission from the Sheriff) to receive a visit. But frankly, none of that is any more difficult to arrange than three-person meetings outside of the dungeons, so there you go.

[Uwaine]

Originally posted by Ennah
I'm tellin' ya! A criminal VP who starts up a crime ring! A high-placed PC could try and start something similar, but there's usually too much at stake for any player to be willing.

Are you kidding? If there was a single competent thug out there, I'd find things for them to do right away. I could keep six busy, easy!

Risk my arse, they're an asset. But don't expect anyone with half a brain to employ people who will bungle things up, get caught, and spew their guts to the law.

[Viceran]

Originally posted by Uwaine
But don't expect anyone with half a brain to employ people who will bungle things up, get caught, and spew their guts to the law.

Amen.

The problem is that people want instant gratification, so their characters sing like a canary rather than grow with a storyline. They take that road because it leads to action right now rather than building up relationships that last and provide entertainment for months at a time.

Consider how many successful characters got where they are through instant gratification versus working the system over a period of time. And when I say "successful character" I don't mean just the ones placed highly on the Chain of Being.

Try picking a side and being loyal to something greater than one individual character (meaning, your own character). I think many people would be surprised what came of it.

[Ryot]

<shrug>

Try lying.

Ryot must've lied to the guards a dozen times. He'd just think of plausible explanations, and conspiracy theories.

-Greg?

[Age]

Originally posted by Ryot
<shrug>

Try lying.

Ryot must've lied to the guards a dozen times. He'd just think of plausible explanations, and conspiracy theories.

-Greg? *grin*

I wish we'd see more explanations in the courts that could actually hold a bit of water, as opposed to the few half-baked conspiracy theories that inevitably get presented, eyes-rolled-at, and dismissed.

Seeing someone actually lie to the courts but make it convincing and have some "evidence" (be it faked or not) that their lie might be plausible, we might see a lower percentage than 90% for conviction rates.

... Not to mention it would probably infuriate the Chancery, but simultaneously entertain the hell out of me on an OOC level.

[Ryot]

Originally posted by Age
*grin*

I wish we'd see more explanations in the courts that could actually hold a bit of water, as opposed to the few half-baked conspiracy theories that inevitably get presented, eyes-rolled-at, and dismissed.


<nod>

Example: Ryot was questioned by the Inquisition about a few of his crimes. He'd hint at deeper reasons for those crimes, and suffer through the smallest amount of torture; THEN, he'd blame whoever he had "SECRET" issues with.

This was funny to -me-, because sometimes there WERE deeper reasons...but sending his enemies on a wild goose chase seemed fitting.

-Greg?

[Ennah]

Originally posted by Uwaine
Are you kidding? If there was a single competent thug out there, I'd find things for them to do right away. I could keep six busy, easy!

Risk my arse, they're an asset. But don't expect anyone with half a brain to employ people who will bungle things up, get caught, and spew their guts to the law.

That's why you train them! Lead them on anonymously for a while, give them some rewards when they don't bungle up. We've yet to see a thug start out being as some sort of mastermind.

Originally posted by Viceran
The problem is that people want instant gratification, so their characters sing like a canary rather than grow with a storyline. They take that road because it leads to action right now rather than building up relationships that last and provide entertainment for months at a time.

If our criminal masterminds don't reach out to the flailing criminal community (Hehehe), there's no other kind of gratification they can expect. If there was some promise of, well, any kind of incentive other than instant action, they'd probably be more willing to stick around. Granted, a lot of these thugs are newlies with swords that probably don't know how to RP right, but they'll always stay that way unless we help them out. ;)

Go crime!

[Viceran]

And therein lies the problem. In order to "help them out" you have to risk your neck. Why would the masterminds, as you called them, risk everything they have built up to extend trust to someone that hasn't proven to be worth trusting?

It's a tough call to make. And this decision is tough for anyone in game as most of our characters whether good or bad have to choose at some point in time if they are willing to trust someone for whatever the purpose may be. I can tell you right now that most characters aren't going to trust some hack-n-slash type or some fly by night criminal just so that OOCly their player can attempt to kick start a path for someone elses character. That just doesn't make sense. The greater portion of risk lies with the mastermind, as they have more to lose.

In my opinion the criminals should cultivate some relationships and earn some favor / trust. But again, all that takes time and isn't in the instant gratification model. I don't think it's a matter of the masterminds not reaching out, I think it's a matter of them being tired of being screwed over every time they do.

[Uwaine]

My character will reach out and contact people as soon as his IC minimum standards are met. Just talking to the wrong criminal can and will ruin any and all career in the Court, if they go blabbing about it and "painting your name on the walls", so to say. Meanwhile, in the past year or so, I have seen one criminal character created that might even begin to fill those (very, very simple) requirements.

If you want to be a successful criminal, don't create "a criminal character." Create a character, get them a background, (some skills!) motivations, contacts, and so on. Have them commit crimes for a reason, not "just because." Sometimes, that sort of character can be fun (Roiss, Ryot) - mostly, they are just nuisances, annoyances, and they are never the kind of person you'd hire.

[Ryot]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

We need the mafia.

...

Or, at least...organized ccrime. I wouldn't have been up for it, as Ryot, but I love the idea.

Work your way up the organization's 'ladder', and there's less risk for more reward. A strict social hierarchy. A strict set of rules. Reprecussions for anything you do AGAINST the organization. If this were the case, the group could just give their people the access to tools, and have a recruiter or two regularly watch the activity of the goal; then go down and recruit/attack their peers.

-Greg?

[Ennah]

Originally posted by Viceran
And therein lies the problem. In order to "help them out" you have to risk your neck. Why would the masterminds, as you called them, risk everything they have built up to extend trust to someone that hasn't proven to be worth trusting?


Which is why I think having a VP would greatly aid.

However, you're absolutely right in that they should be encouraged to develop relationships and the like as it provides more RP and plot. Unfortunately, that leads to the problem that they'll be more hesitant to risk what they've gained.

It's a tricky balance.

[TonyD]

So, what about more support for the criminals, then?

I see two problems here:

1) "I don't want to hire a criminal who will get caught"

2) Criminals are just in it for instant gratification, and will see you out.

Now, with the way the game works, I understand 1. I don't want to be a criminal mastermind who everyone knows is a criminal and will never advance because of it. Assuming I even stay out of prison.

With the smart criminals hiding and not getting caught, I understand 2. I don't see many/any opportunities for crime in the castle. Heck, I can't even punch someone without their permission. I heard vague rumors about some group of criminals, and that's about where it ended. The only way I'd be able to get their attention is to be really obviously asking after them, or going out committing obvious crimes.

What we really need in this situation is a Lex Luthor criminal mastermind. Superman sure knows who the bad guy is. He defeats some scientists with a kryptonite-gun, notices the LuthoCorp logo, bashes down Lex's door, and lex says "You woke me? What do you want? Oh really? Well...interesting you say that, our factory had a prototype mining lazer stolen last night. I don't care what the criminals said, they're obviously covering for their REAL boss. Now, are you going to pay to repair that wall you just knocked down?"

It could be really fun for the masterminds to be known in the castle. They could banter words with the guards. They could hang out with their thugs (but never while on a "job")

They could curse out their incompetant thugs who got caught
(I'm only annoyed because he's my bodyguard. Of course I don't approve of his crime, he never should have done that! But I'm going to pull strings to get my bodyguard out of prison and guarding my body again.)

I can see lots of roleplaying there for the *known* masterminds (masterminds would probably be distinct from criminals, because they likely wouldn't commit the actual crimes themselves)

...but....for this to happen they need support. They need to get together with the Chancellory and the watch, and do that communal storytelling thing, where they say, OOC, "Hey, I'm going to do this evil plot...involve a lot of players...yeah, we'll do it on friday" and then when it happens, the crims get caught or escape, when one says "It was Lex Luthor" Priam can say "*yawn* Yes, we all know Luthor's reputation. You could just be using his name because it's plausible. Without solid proof, you'd better keep quiet"

- The watch gets heads-up about crimes, and can be there to have an exciting showdown
- The criminals know who to contact to get involved in more long-term schemes, and aren't forced to rely on bullying or instant gratification crimes
- The lawyers can rush through the cases, by dealing with players in bulk, and being given all the details OOC by both the watch and mastermind, so the IC investigations can happen quicker. Which means we can focus on the RP of the trial more
- Criminals will develop loyalty to their group. If they sell out their mastermind, or fellows, they will get a beating, and risk loosing the support of their group.
- It will be *fun* to get caught, part of the story. You'll go to prison. Talk to the mastermind, see if you get rewarded for the "sacrifice" you made, and your loyalty in keeping quiet. You'll get a big trial, (which you don't have to wait a long time for) where you can scream, or go meekly, or whatever. Players get the chance to pull strings, make excuses for their minions etc.

And all it really needs is for a few players to just keep each other informed, and to give the mastermind players a bit more "protection" OOC from the law (to take into account the fact that they're taking more risk by playing this role). They need not be immune, the player should still be careful, have plausible excuses on-hand, wear disguise cloaks when giving criminal orders, have at least half of the minions with a different story, so the courts don't know which version to believe, bribe people into giving false evidence etc.

[Uwaine]

Problem with disguise cloaks:

The only way to get one, as far as I know, is to kill someone who has one. The NPC (VP) who was able to procure/produce them is long gone.


Now, why would a VP mastermind villain be better than PC mastermind villain? They can't take any more risks than a PC of comparable status - the Guard won't give a crap if it's an NPC or a PC they're going after. Sure, they'd have more items, coding support, and so on, but that's another problem entirely (the solution being that the StoryPeople need to give more such support to PCs; VPs get it easy, PCs are made to pay hundreds of storypoints and/or wait for months, and even then nothing likely comes of it).

I don't see any big issue, myself. If someone would just play a thug that is "employable" (not wantonly destructive, has a background, bothers to be around, and proves they can keep their mouth shut, and makes a bit of a name for themselves), they'll get hired. Myself, I have my character make a point of going to watch trials that are announced, to see what kind of people are committing crimes. I can tell you, there has been practically no one who's employable.

Once someone is hireable (i.e., not just a violent, incompetent idiot), all the rest will take care of itself very nicely.

[Ennah]

Most of these people are probably unaware that they could even possibly be hired, otherwise they might try to make a bit of a better presentation.

... And I think you pretty stated exactly why a VP villain would have it easier than a PC villain. It's far more difficult for a PC villain to provide to his underlings than it would be for a VP.

One of the main things about Uwaine being a villain is that only people who've been playing a long time know anything about him. He doesn't advertise his, uh... villainous... ness... and the only reason I even know is that it gets mentioned in OOC boards (and I've been around a year now). Of course, his continued success is probably entirely due to the fact that he doesn't advertise.

Criminal types are completely on their own with little to no support from the community, whether or not a complex background is made and relationships forged. In the past I was able to help one PC get a modicum of notoriety, but after that it was just a lot of bitching and complaining from everyone else as the whole castle bore down on him without offering any OOC help. The PC was incarcerated and then never heard from again, and the player was a good one! From what I've seen, people are quicker to complain before offering any help or support. Either that or they sit back and wait for someone to "get it right" without even hinting at what "right" is.

Oh, a note on disguise cloaks and the like, I've been told that the issue is being worked on.

[Viceran]

Originally posted by TonyD
So, what about more support for the criminals, then?

I see two problems here:

1) "I don't want to hire a criminal who will get caught"

I don't think this is the problem. It's not that they care if the criminal gets caught, it's that they care what the criminal does -after- they get caught.

Originally posted by TonyD
2) Criminals are just in it for instant gratification, and will see you out.

See answer to number one. Need some honor among thieves (or criminals in this case). ;)

[TonyD]

Originally posted by Ennah
Most of these people are probably unaware that they could even possibly be hired

Exactly. Why "put on a good show" if you don't know there's any point behind it.

Originally posted by Ennah
One of the main things about Uwaine being a villain is that only people who've been playing a long time know anything about him. He doesn't advertise his, uh... villainous... ness... and the only reason I even know is that it gets mentioned in OOC boards (and I've been around a year now). Of course, his continued success is probably entirely due to the fact that he doesn't advertise.

I'm entirely not criticizing (since both types are important), but I think it's important to have both obvious and hidden criminals. If a player can be in the game for a year and, IC, know nothing about Uwaine's criminal activities, it's just as likely a criminal could do that, too. So where are the responsible criminals meant to get involved?
It seems to me that we need some "obvious" PC or NPC criminal patrons. The sort of guy that you just KNOW is involved, but there's never any evidence.
And that PC or NPC needs to have some way of rewarding underlings. Even if just some way of getting their underlings out of prison quickly. Preferably something more than that.

Originally posted by Ennah
...as the whole castle bore down on him without offering any OOC help. The PC was incarcerated and then never heard from again, and the player was a good one!

That's the problem. The "good guys" want to live, and as a player I don't want my character spending all his time in the dungeons.
But as a player (my character would feel different, of course) I think it's more fun to FAIL (at least occasionally) and get caught for the crimes. It leads to much more roleplaying for all. Firstly, it involves the public, the watch, the trial. Builds relationships for my character "You're the watchman that pretends to be so noble, but you're just a thug in a uniform", "you're the watchman I respect, for treating me well even though I'm a criminal", "You're the watchman that hinted I should offer a bribe".

Wouldn't it be so much more interesting to encourage the criminal players to let themselves get captured, as part of the story? And then to have other options. Perhaps I can bribe a guard with my nice boots if he lets me free...no need for me to go to trial, the story's come to a nice conclusion, the plot was foiled (but the criminal is still around for future plots, and the player didn't have to sit out of the game for a week)...

That, of course, requires that there's a few corruptable guard PCs, that they are discerning enough to not free every criminal and get caught themselves, that....

...but the point is, if a criminal keeps themselves hidden, doesn't let anyone catch wind of their plans, they might be *successful* but it won't (always) lead to so much roleplaying. If that's what you enjoy, great, go for it. Other players enjoy watching the bad guys get defeated. Think ninja turtles, Shredder gets defeated almost every time, but almost always escapes.
But I'm certainly not playing "shredder" who'll loose almost every time, if loosing means I get my character ganged up on, locked up, and less roleplay. That's just silly.

Originally posted by Ennah
I don't think this is the problem. It's not that they care if the criminal gets caught, it's that they care what the criminal does -after- they get caught.
...
See answer to number one. Need some honor among thieves (or criminals in this case).

But this is simply solved.
1) the watch knows who the "mastermind" characters are, and gives them a bit of a break when their flunkies sell them out "yes, we'll investigate, but there's no evidence" or "ah, we've got him now! *gives heads-up and plot where mastermind plants false evidence*"
- since you know the other players will treat you right, and not have the whole castle gang up on you (as in Ennah's example), you can take more risk with players who might sell your character out (and them selling you out could lead to more roleplaying)

2) the mastermind needs some way of rewarding their minions, be it pins or items that can be taken away later, or some ongoing advantage for loyal characters. The players will then have a game-incentive to not throw their patron to the wolves, and the other criminals will also have an incentive to protect their patron. This means that if one does choose to sell out their patron, there's a plot where the other criminals have motivation to stop the shill.

It's also the patron's job, or at least one of his minions job, if the criminal gets caught, to deal with that. This could be a visit to them in the dungeon, to promise rewards for their loyal (if bungled) service, or to apologize for their incarceration, or to threaten to slit their throat if they talk.

I can think of a lot of easily coded advantages from the top of my head.
- assassin patron: while you're loyal, your swordfighting cuts are a little more effective (or your patron can train you in sword - I hear it's hard for criminals to receive training)
- rich noble patron: prison time is almost unheard of, and despite your low rank you are granted access to more "rich" areas, such as the inner bailey
- thieves and sneaks: ability to temporarily borrow castle keys from your patron
- lawyer patron: um, do these count as criminals? Perhaps not, but they certainly could be a very visible anti-chancellory group, defending anyone regardless of seeming guilt or innocence. Could help get the convictions to below 90%. Think wolfram and hart from Angel, they don't have to be individually evil, but can make a great "bad guy group"

all of which (other than maybe sword training you've already received) are advantages that will vanish as soon as you sell out your patron, giving players an ongoing incentive to stay loyal.

If we want honour among thieves, we have to actually give them a reason to be honorable. An extra week in the dungeons is not a good reason.

[SPXios]

I would tend to think more than if a person gets arrested it would be if they rat you out. For as long as I've known, there have been criminal characters that suddenly want to be "good" and so turn in whoever is their more powerful contact.

Or if they rat you out, do they do so convincingly or make it sound like they just picked your name because you are the Lex Luther.

[SPXios]

Originally posted by Ryot
Work your way up the organization's 'ladder', and there's less risk for more reward. A strict social hierarchy. A strict set of rules. Reprecussions for anything you do AGAINST the organization. If this were the case, the group could just give their people the access to tools, and have a recruiter or two regularly watch the activity of the goal; then go down and recruit/attack their peers.

Exactly.

[TonyD]

Originally posted by SPXios
Or if they rat you out, do they do so convincingly or make it sound like they just picked your name because you are the Lex Luther.

True, and this is where the law would have to make judgement calls.
If it's a "I want to hit things" character who was being given a chance, the law can say "hey, dude, you just picked that name" and be done with it.

If it's an intelligently run character who does so convincingly, this still need not be the end. It just means it'll spark a more interesting plot, where Lex Luther plants false evidence to prove their innocence, or where they get "witnesses" that discredit the shill. It can still be done, it's just more of a story.

And...really...if most of the sellout criminals are roleplaying convincingly, providing evidence etc, isn't that, generally, a good thing? It means we've got something good happening.

From what I hear, most can't even do a half-decent lie during their trial. I doubt they'll be able to convincingly finger their patron, other than saying "It was him. He told me to do it. And those people too", and all those people would say "uh, no. We were all playing poker"

[Priam]

Wait... what you're saying is the PLAYERS of the law-enforcement types should give the criminal mastermind CHARACTERS a "break" ?

Homey don't go for that. It's called cross-over.

You can believe that every single law-enforcement character I know personally would come down as hard as possible/reasonable on anyone they suspect of a crime. That's their character, and that's what they do.

[Priam]

Originally posted by TonyD
From what I hear, most can't even do a half-decent lie during their trial. I doubt they'll be able to convincingly finger their patron, other than saying "It was him. He told me to do it. And those people too", and all those people would say "uh, no. We were all playing poker"
Actually, the people in the old Watch (Eeva-era) and the current Guard put people on their "black list" based on "evidence" that would never fly in court. Just talking often with a criminal is enough to make you a suspected accomplice or "patron". (Oh, the amount of courtiers who have the "disfavor" of the Guard... ;) )

What else are they supposed to do? Trust people? In this Castle? Ehehe.

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by Priam
Wait... what you're saying is the PLAYERS of the law-enforcement types should give the criminal mastermind CHARACTERS a "break" ?

Dude, criminals and our players are always being screamed at to give people a "break," or else law-enforcement will just restrain us, our victims just refuse consent and mock us, or just disconnect and ignore us. Weren't you aware that being a criminal player meant that you have to be very, very nice?

-Anonymouse

[Rosalind]

This is something lately my character had to deal with. I try to give every chance to criminals as a player, citing the naivete of her. Unfortunately the first one (Epenyne) just up and kills her sister and I get endless scrolls about the ones in the Office of Heraldry (Gangrel whose been dismissed from inactivity and Belziel who people are in an uproar about).

We, as players, can try to give criminal characters a break but it can only go so far. When your character has blood-red eyes and sharpened teeth (like Gangrel) or vicious eyes and a cruel mouth (like Belziel) you've obviously and blatantly made it clear that you've worked hard to create a repeat criminal.

Rosalind doesn't even pay attention to those things but still, she can only be so naive and it can only go so far. Get Inner Bailey access BEFORE you repeatedly commit crimes. There's only so much, as a player, I can do to help that sort of thing before it become gross negligence and Rosalind would be remiss in her duties and endangering the Castle, getting my character screwed because, as a player, I try to promote roleplay.

"Good-guy" players can only do so much to 'help out' "bad-guy" characters, if anything at all, like Priam said. If you're going to put that much time, effort, money (like storypoints), then think about your long-term goals as a criminal. Most of us like the Mastermind criminal thing, but we're not willing to completely crossover to help out and ruin our own characters in the process.

I tried to do that for a while, but it's to the point that it just isn't realistic to the game and the characters involved.

My two cents from my own experiences.

[Priam]

Originally posted by Anonymouse
Dude, criminals and our players are always being screamed at to give people a "break," or else law-enforcement will just restrain us, our victims just refuse consent and mock us, or just disconnect and ignore us. Weren't you aware that being a criminal player meant that you have to be very, very nice?

-Anonymouse

I've played a murderer/assaulter, thank you, and I know how it goes. (Incidentally, he was forgotten - as in, no one was on the case - in the dungeons for two or three months.)

However, altering your character's actions for OOC reasons is cross-over. Asking someone - either criminal or law-enforcement - to do so is also cross-over. My alts certainly won't stop pursuing the deserved death of an enemy because the players ask me to be "nicer."

As for being restrained - if you ROLE-PLAY, you don't get auto-restrained. If you don't, or RP yourself as some sort of superman, you do get auto-restrained and thrown in a cell with minimum waste of time.

And how about using a NAME?

[Shadust]

Just be patient, everyone....

[Belziel]

All decisions have consequences to them that we have to accept. If you wish to play a criminal character (or even a reformed criminal for that matter), you need to be mindful of the difficulty of getting /any/ kind of opportunity. As a player of a reformed character especially, you'd have to adapt to the fact that the "normal" way to go about things will not work for you. It is for this reason that reformed criminal usually revert back to their ways and not vice versa.

Perhaps playing a criminal in Marrach is the best way to see that it's truly not worth becoming such IRL. How's that for a lesson?

:)

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by Priam

And how about using a NAME?

I think the purpose of using an anonymous account is specifically in order to disguise the name of the poster.

Your post highlights an issue with the present system, which I appreciate that you cited.

As for being restrained - if you ROLE-PLAY, you don't get auto-restrained. If you don't, or RP yourself as some sort of superman, you do get auto-restrained and thrown in a cell with minimum waste of time.

Who makes that judgment that the criminal character (hereafter referred to as the Lawbreaker) role-playing suitably or not? The law character in question (hereafter referred as the Guardsman) does. It is a system where the judger (the Guardsman’s player) may have subjective interest in the outcome, an inherently flawed system since the judge’s impartiality may be affected. In US tort law, a judge with any family, social, political or other relationship that influences the decision is discouraged from judging on a case. Furthermore, the judge is disallowed from ruling on any case that may advance the private interest of the judge.

There are assists, of course, but vast majority of the time they are not filed - making the Guardsman in question the ultimate arbiter. On that criteria of US tort law, the Guardsman’s player is judging on a case over the Lawbreaker that may advance the private interest of the player. This is an inherently flawed system.

To preemptively dull the automatic comeback that I am bound to receive informing me Castle Marrach’s justice system is medieval; the salient issue I am discussing here is OOC fairness between players of the Lawbreaker and the Guardsman here, not in-game fairness of the judicial system.

In spite of my sardonic approach earlier, I do not fundamentally believe that the current system must be changed. Parser abuse new characters are a broad problem that must be handled. But the possible necessity of the current system should not overlook the essential disparity and disadvantage that Lawbreakers experience.

The bona fide principle of this post is not to cast culpability on any of the before mentioned parties. I am not trying to blame you, Thomas, the Guardsmen, or anyone.
Neither is the purpose of the post to denigrate you, and I would be grateful if the same consideration is provided to me. I congratulate you if you played a Lawbreaker successfully, and appreciate your personal experience of the Gaol system. Conjecture now if that was your main, or if you only played one character.

Objectively, I yearn for some creative ideas to address the before mentioned flaws of the current system. It is my conviction that all concepts can be improved through discussion and contemplation.

The present system is a very serviceable concept. I’m also sure it can also be improved if we brainstorm it.

[Age]

Originally posted by Anonymouse
I think the purpose of using an anonymous account is specifically in order to disguise the name of the poster.

Yes, for IC things.

Using an anonymous account for OOC player-to-player discussions isn't met with very favourable opinions by the playerbase, the majority of the time.

[Lucus]

Originally posted by Anonymouse

In US tort law, a judge with any family, social, political or other relationship that influences the decision is discouraged from judging on a case. Furthermore, the judge is disallowed from ruling on any case that may advance the private interest of the judge.

That's great and all, but US tort law has nothing to do with Castle Marrach. Firstly we don't all live in the US, so that law likely doesn't exist in the same capacity if at all in all the varying places CMers come from. Secondly, considering we're all playing the same game in the same community, it's rather hard to find a "judge" that has no social relationship with those being judged, as you described above.

Lin

[silvarilon]

Originally posted by Lucus
That's great and all, but US tort law has nothing to do with Castle Marrach.

I don't think Anon was trying to say that US law was the important thing. I think he was trying to point out an example where we think it's really unfair for a biased person to be making the decision, some example that most people (even non-USians) would think is reasonable.

Originally posted by Lucus
considering we're all playing the same game in the same community, it's rather hard to find a "judge" that has no social relationship with those being judged, as you described above.

Lin

True, that's a good point. The most impartial judge is a computer-run system, but that boils down to a system combat, which is always going to be less fun than a well-run player combat. And also means that either newlies can run around causing trouble, or else the older guards will always be able to beat them, no matter how well roleplayed their criminal is.
The other problem with a system-judge is playes will get used to "trusting" it, and will think it's OK to do something because the system lets them. That might be less fun for the criminal who, right now, gets the chance to roleplay the fight despite being new, who will just get beaten over the head with a combat system.

The current system should work, as long as guards only use their powers on newlies who can't roleplay, or oldlies who refuse to roleplay reasonably.
*shrug*

The only other practical solution I can think of would be to have the staff adjudicate the fights. This actually happens on other games (white wolf moderated roleplay is one I can think of) - but can be frustrating for the players when no staff is around. They're forced to use roleplay to sort it out, and can't resolve anything if one wants to be "superman" (which is the current situation, I suppose, except in that case the guard wins). It can also be frustrating for the staff, as they need to adjudicate the fights.
The advantage, though, is the staff get more involved, and can do other fun stuff for the players, like making emits in the room, or describing things that the players might not be qualified to decide, such as NPC reactions

so...it's really just a matter of flavour. What works for the theme of the game and the maturity of the players? None will ever be perfect, pick the flaws that you can live with.

Hopefully as more and more games come out (Lovecraft, MV, TEC etc.) the players will be able to choose the game with the systems they prefer.

Cheers,
Tony

[John]

Originally posted by Age
Yes, for IC things.

Using an anonymous account for OOC player-to-player discussions isn't met with very favourable opinions by the playerbase, the majority of the time.
Actally, thats not true. A number of people use accounts not related to their main accounts becouse they fear retroubution. Its only looked down on if they do it to do nothing but bashing. But if they are trying to prevent OOC/IC crossover, then its Exactly the same reason staff accounts dont post about their charicters ooc, and the other way around.

[Age]

If you have something to say, say it.

Don't hide behind an anonymous account.

If someone uses what you say OOCly against you IC, then file an assist.

That's really all I have to say on the topic of anonymous OOC player accounts. I think they're childish and unneccessary.

[Gabs]

How is someone's unrational fear that the lawpeople and/or other characters will get his or her character IC for expressing his or her opinion on the OOC forums the same as staff having different forums account?

As Age just said: "If someone uses what you say OOCly against you IC, then file an assist."

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by Age
If you have something to say, say it.

Don't hide behind an anonymous account.

If someone uses what you say OOCly against you IC, then file an assist.

That's really all I have to say on the topic of anonymous OOC player accounts. I think they're childish and unneccessary.

I am very sorry that you feel that way. However, can we please keep this discussion from digressing to anonymous accounts and keep it about constructive ideas about the current system?

Thanks.

[John]

Originally posted by Gabs
How is someone's unrational fear that the lawpeople and/or other characters will get his or her character IC for expressing his or her opinion on the OOC forums the same as staff having different forums account?

As Age just said: "If someone uses what you say OOCly against you IC, then file an assist."
Mayhap they dont want to have to deal with it. There is no rule saying someone has to post from their main account. If someone wants to post something for even as little reason as not having it colored by preconceptions (example, if lance got a new forum name to post becouse he got harped on last time and it was dragged off topic becouse it was him who said it)

The point is, for good or for bad, they dont want to have their post linked to their main account. Unless they use this to break ToS its legal and allowed, and their choice.

[silvarilon]

Originally posted by Belziel
All decisions have consequences to them that we have to accept. If you wish to play a criminal character (or even a reformed criminal for that matter), you need to be mindful of the difficulty of getting /any/ kind of opportunity. As a player of a reformed character especially, you'd have to adapt to the fact that the "normal" way to go about things will not work for you. It is for this reason that reformed criminal usually revert back to their ways and not vice versa.

Perhaps playing a criminal in Marrach is the best way to see that it's truly not worth becoming such IRL. How's that for a lesson?

:)

I'd agree, except...

...isn't it more fun for the law abiding characters, as well, if there are a few well-run and responsibly roleplayed criminals around?

Leads to rumor, scandal, plots etc.

And by responsibly run, I mean they won't just burst in, mug you to get your items, and tun run off and keep those things. They'll plan into their story that you can get your items back (if OOC it'll upset the player that is stolen from), or other such things.
And the law will give them the same respect, and plan into the story that the criminal can get away with a certain amount of crime in the interest of making a fun story.

Now, my studies of medieval swordfighting tell me that I really do NOT want to go into battle with a sword. Doesn't mean I can't have fun roleplaying a watchman who does exactly that. Otherwise all I'd do is roleplay computer programmers.

[Shadust]

Originally posted by Priam
Wait... what you're saying is the PLAYERS of the law-enforcement types should give the criminal mastermind CHARACTERS a "break" ?

Homey don't go for that. It's called cross-over.

You can believe that every single law-enforcement character I know personally would come down as hard as possible/reasonable on anyone they suspect of a crime. That's their character, and that's what they do.

I don't think he's talking about crossover....he's talking about cooperative storytelling.

He's talking about not looking at the game as "I'm Priam the Guardsman, and the Guard has -alot- of IC power. I can throw it all at anyone that steps out of line, totally destroying them. And since that is what my character would do...I'm going to do it."

Instead he's saying maybe in some instances saying "Hmm. I -could- go after Criminal X with every shell of ammo I have, but that's gonna make for a very predictable and short story. Instead, since I really -don't- have all the evidence I could have, I'm going to slow play this for awhile. Let the plot build a bit more, and see what story my fellow player is trying to tell."

I don't see anything wrong with this.

[Vlad]

Originally posted by silvarilon

And the law will give them the same respect, and plan into the story that the criminal can get away with a certain amount of crime in the interest of making a fun story.


:rolleyes: When has that ever happened?

But that's really not what I was speaking about in the first place.

[TonyD]

Originally posted by Shadust
I don't think he's talking about crossover....he's talking about cooperative storytelling.

He's talking about not looking at the game as "I'm Priam the Guardsman, and the Guard has -alot- of IC power. I can throw it all at anyone that steps out of line, totally destroying them. And since that is what my character would do...I'm going to do it."

Instead he's saying maybe in some instances saying "Hmm. I -could- go after Criminal X with every shell of ammo I have, but that's gonna make for a very predictable and short story. Instead, since I really -don't- have all the evidence I could have, I'm going to slow play this for awhile. Let the plot build a bit more, and see what story my fellow player is trying to tell."

I don't see anything wrong with this.

Exactly!

Let's look at it like this. In real life, we don't want criminals. They make trouble for society. They make drama and upset, and all things that aren't fun in real life. They make stories. Ugh, I don't want that!
So we punish criminals as much as we can (without punishing innocent people, or unduly punishing them more than they deserve). We want to STOP criminals, and more than that, we want to STOP people from being criminals.

But in the game, we WANT drama, and upset, and all those things (for our characters, not for our players) - that's what makes good RP. We want to ENCOURAGE players to be criminals.

So...part of that encouragement is to...well, call it OOC if you want, I prefer Shadust's "cooperative roleplay" - don't go in all guns blazing to get the criminal no matter what. Just because you as a player have knowledge (even if gained in-game) doesn't mean your character necessarily would act on that knowledge.

It might be realistic for Priam to go after the criminal no matter what. That's fine. Priam could corner the criminal in a room, go in for the arrest...then Priam's character could consentially let the criminal escape. The criminal could land a good punch, or hit Priam over the head to knock him out, or...any number of good IC reasons. I bet you allow other players to do things like that (although probably not as violent) in-game if they're NOT criminals. Priam "just happens" to notice the Sera's beautiful new bracelet, because it's obvious that the player wants to RP showing it off etc.
Priam could just as easily "just happen" to get knocked out, so the criminal can escape. While IC priam is even *more* determined to capture this crim.

As far as I'm concerned, that IS OOC, but it's not crossover. We NEED to take into account that, OOC, there are other real humans who also want to have fun. We also need to take into account that those other humans are giving us fun plots to run. I bet Priam would be more interested to deal with a case about a criminal who escaped from the guards three times (including once by knocking Priam unconcious), took a sera hostage, then surrendered, rather than someone who stole an item and got locked up for two weeks, before saying "yeah, I stole it. So behead me."

It's OOC because we're bearing in mind that this is a story we're telling, and trying to tell the most fun story possible. C'mon, when did the Ninja Turtles ever turn up, and beat the bad guys first time? The bad guys have to escape a few times, to allow for the Final Showdown(tm). That's the way to make it most fun for the good guys, too.

[TonyD]

Originally posted by Vlad
:rolleyes: When has that ever happened?

But that's really not what I was speaking about in the first place.

When has this ever happened?

If we're trying to play a communal storytelling game, and one group of players has no respect for a different group of players...then there's a big problem.

Those groups shouldn't be playing together.

I can't think of any other response.

[Vlad]

Originally posted by TonyD
When has this ever happened?

If we're trying to play a communal storytelling game, and one group of players has no respect for a different group of players...then there's a big problem.

Those groups shouldn't be playing together.

I can't think of any other response.

In my experience, criminals have rarely been given any leeway as to victory opportunities with the exception of when skills are in question. It's widely expected that every plot ends with the criminal getting caught in the end.

[Gabs]

Then perhaps the criminals also need to plan their criminal acts better if they don't want to get caught immediately. It's not fair to exigeate law people give them more leeway despite the fact they are working their asses off if most of these criminals won't even make the efforts to make the whole chasing and final showdown worthwhile.

And by "plan their criminal acts better", I don't mean "check the who list every 30 seconds to see when all the lawkeepers remove their badges or pins and/or log off". :rolleyes:

[TonyD]

Originally posted by Vlad
It's widely expected that every plot ends with the criminal getting caught in the end.

I have no problem with that expectation. It's widely expected that every movie ends with the bad guy being defeated. That's part of our storytelling culture, that good wins in the end.

But that's why it's MORE important for the law to respect the criminal players, and vice versa. It's more important for them to communially tell the story where the bad guy sometimes escapes, or wins, but is defeated in the long run. It involves letting the criminal escape the first few times, on the understanding that he'll have a big showdown and get caught in the end.

This involves not grabbing him as soon as he leaves the room, and locking him in the dungeons. It involves letting him slip his cuffs and escape after being captured. It also involves the criminal letting the law know when he'll be around, so they can plan the showdown if necessary. Or the criminal dropping some clues, if the watch just don't happen to be in the right place at the right time. It involves the players not trying to WIN, even if the characters are trying their hardest.

And it involves Priam not going "I'm going to go after the criminal with everything I've got, and punish him to the full extent of the law" after the criminal helpfully pages him to let him know where the clues are.

[TonyD]

Originally posted by Gabs
Then perhaps the criminals also need to plan their criminal acts better if they don't want to get caught immediately. It's not fair to exigeate law people give them more leeway despite the fact they are working their asses off if most of these criminals won't even make the efforts to make the whole chasing and final showdown worthwhile.

And by "plan their criminal acts better", I don't mean "check the who list every 30 seconds to see when all the lawkeepers remove their badges or pins and/or log off". :rolleyes:

I agree!
The criminals SHOULD plan their crimes better. Or if not, plan their arrests better. When the law bursts in, instead of fighting, just @page the watchmember and say "hey, how about we have a long chase, and end up in the courtyard. I really want to take a hostage. Sounds like a fun arrest?"

It's more the criminals responsibility than the watchmans responsibility to plan this out.

By the same token, if after this fun hostage-taking arrest scene the criminal ends up in the dungeons for three months...they're not likely to do it again. Next time they'll genuinely try to avoid the lawkeepers by checking the who list every 30 seconds...

I consider an important part of planning a criminal act to be also planning what clues you'll leave, and how your character can get captured/punished. That's part of the story. Part of your plan might be "I'll escape this time, steal another two things, then when the castle is talking about all the thefts lately, THEN I'll get caught" - and keep OOC records of who the items were stolen from, so the lawkeepers can return the stolen goods afterwards.
If the law is going to be nice to criminal players, the criminals have to do their planning and act responsibly.

The flip side is, the law has to, at least with the well planned crimes, go along with the criminals plans. If I steal from one person, and get arrested, it doesn't matter about my plans to do a rash of thefts before getting captured...
I could page the lawmaker and say "hey, I want to steal a bit more before getting caught. I'll return all the items after getting caught, don't worry" and if they just respond with "That's OOC crossover, you're going to jail" then...well, there's not much I can do. I've wasted my time/energy with this plot, and got my character removed from the game for a few weeks into the bargain.

And I'm not saying the lawmaker has to, IC, let you go. IC there could be a wrestle, before the criminal escapes and runs away.

[Priam]

Originally posted by TonyD
It might be realistic for Priam to go after the criminal no matter what. That's fine. Priam could corner the criminal in a room, go in for the arrest...then Priam's character could consentially let the criminal escape. The criminal could land a good punch, or hit Priam over the head to knock him out, or...any number of good IC reasons. I bet you allow other players to do things like that (although probably not as violent) in-game if they're NOT criminals.

That's an entirely different issue.

If someone RPs a fight or escape well, they manage it. Roiss got away from Priam despite only having a rebated sword against Priam's live one. Ryot had a mail hauberk, so Priam didn't get him, either.

But changing how I investigate something is in another class entirely. Frankly, I don't see why it'd even be necessary. There are plenty of big-time criminals (many of them members of the Court) who the Guard can't nail no matter how hard they try! If those people (players, not VPs) can manage it, why should anyone else be given slack? There's going to be successful criminals and unsuccessful criminals, and it's all in the power of the player to make the difference.


Incidentally, some of us do not consider random violence perpetrated by characters less than a month old, in the same patterns (Priam could give you a lecture IC about how it progresses with every single perp), over and over, good RP. Some of us consider it a waste of time.

Now, characters with actual pasts, motivations, ties to the Castle... that's a different animal altogether.

Originally posted by Vlad
In my experience, criminals have rarely been given any leeway as to victory opportunities with the exception of when skills are in question. It's widely expected that every plot ends with the criminal getting caught in the end.

Oh, BS. Skout and Sindale only got caught in the loosest sense of the word. Helene was untouchable. Sansloy - well, just ask Priam if he thinks that one got resolved properly.

Petty criminals will get caught, because the Castle is such a small place. But criminals who don't let themselves be incriminated, or who have formed connections - they don't have to run at all.

Originally posted by TonyD
I could page the lawmaker and say "hey, I want to steal a bit more before getting caught. I'll return all the items after getting caught, don't worry" and if they just respond with "That's OOC crossover, you're going to jail" then...well, there's not much I can do. I've wasted my time/energy with this plot, and got my character removed from the game for a few weeks into the bargain.

And I'm not saying the lawmaker has to, IC, let you go. IC there could be a wrestle, before the criminal escapes and runs away.

See, maybe I'm weird, but the first? That's someone begging me OOC to let them off IC. Not cool.

If they just RP without stopping for what I (perhaps unjustly) perceive as whining, I have no problem RPing a fight, and if the criminal can actually beat a guy who's been trained by one of the best and has had a ton of experience in what he's doing, they can get away. It's been done. However, it just puts me on defensive if they start paging me about it first. I don't agree to results beforehand, and never will. If they can't RP someone who's a clever fighter (you hardly have to be a parser wizard), maybe they shouldn't be trying to RP someone who can get away from the law.

[TonyD]

Originally posted by Priam
That's an entirely different issue.

If someone RPs a fight or escape well, they manage it. Roiss got away from Priam despite only having a rebated sword against Priam's live one. Ryot had a mail hauberk, so Priam didn't get him, either.

Cool :)
Although the "power" is still in the hands of the lawkeepers, who decide if the escape was roleplayed well, but I think we can deal with this :)

Originally posted by Priam
But changing how I investigate something is in another class entirely. Frankly, I don't see why it'd even be necessary. There are plenty of big-time criminals (many of them members of the Court) who the Guard can't nail no matter how hard they try! If those people (players, not VPs) can manage it, why should anyone else be given slack? There's going to be successful criminals and unsuccessful criminals, and it's all in the power of the player to make the difference.

Sure, but is this obvious to the newly player? Do they get a clear impression that the way to become a criminal is to make the ties and become untouchable? That's a seperate issue, though, and I do take your point.

Originally posted by Priam
Incidentally, some of us do not consider random violence perpetrated by characters less than a month old, in the same patterns (Priam could give you a lecture IC about how it progresses with every single perp), over and over, good RP. Some of us consider it a waste of time.

I concur, and in those cases it seems entirely reasonable to just restrian and imprison the character, giving them roleplay if they respond with roleplay.

Originally posted by Priam
Now, characters with actual pasts, motivations, ties to the Castle... that's a different animal altogether.

Exactly! But how are they treated differently? Other than them occasionaly escaping if they roleplay the fight well enough?

Originally posted by Priam
See, maybe I'm weird, but the first? That's someone begging me OOC to let them off IC. Not cool.

If they just RP without stopping for what I (perhaps unjustly) perceive as whining, I have no problem RPing a fight, and if the criminal can actually beat a guy who's been trained by one of the best and has had a ton of experience in what he's doing, they can get away. It's been done.

Ah, but it's not someone begging you OOC to let them off IC. Notice I very specifically said that, in the example, the criminal plans to get caught. It's not "don't catch me whine whine whine I want my character to be free." it's "I'm building a plot here, can you help me build the plot, my character will get caught, but I'd like to do a bit more first" - yes, as an OOC action, you're letting the character free. But, as an equally OOC action, the player should then make sure they get caught. Leads to a more exciting story that way. If the criminal asks OOC for you to let them free because they are building to something, and all they're building to is "more crime" and "I'm uncatchable" then that's bad roleplay, and should be treated as such.

Originally posted by Priam
However, it just puts me on defensive if they start paging me about it first. I don't agree to results beforehand, and never will.

But isn't that part of the communal storytelling thing?
If I have an escape artist character, isn't it actually useful for me to page you and say "hey, I want to run the plot where I escape, and then put your girlfriend in danger as "revenge" - so you can burst in at the last minute, save her, and capture me"

you can page back going "that's alright with me, but you have to convincingly roleplay your escape"

That way you know what I'm about, I know what you're about. You will know not to +restrain me, and quickly march me to the dungeons, but give time for the escape attempt. You might even stop to talk to someone on the way, or...*shrug*
...or, if I punch you, while restrained, you might RP that your character staggers back, or something, giving me the roleplaying opportunity to play out my escape. If I didn't give you the warning, you might have just ignored the punch, or assumed your character is tough enough to ignore it, thinking I'm just being petulant after getting caught.

Originally posted by Priam
If they can't RP someone who's a clever fighter (you hardly have to be a parser wizard), maybe they shouldn't be trying to RP someone who can get away from the law.

There are lots of ways for non-good fighters (although still clever) to get away from the law. If you have a sword, and they don't, they might surrender, then grapple with you when you come close. They could even (story wise), steal your sword from you. The question is...would you hand over your sword to another player? Or, since a battle like that is consensual, would you assume that they don't manage to grapple it away from you?
Wouldn't you be much happier to hand over the sword if the player had, OOC, already told you that they plan to get captured, they're just going to run to the courtyard, take a hostage, and have a more dramatic showdown?

It's always going to be a somewhat OOC decision of yours as to whether they can wrestle the sword from you or not. Can't you make a better OOC decision with more OOC information?
Or if the player OOC assures you that you'll get your sword back?


Thanks for the examples of successful criminals, and cases where players can RP escaping, it helps me understand where your position is. It also makes me revise my opinion as to what seems possible or impossible for criminals to do. :)

[Demon-Yuber]

Originally posted by Vlad

It's widely expected that every plot ends with the criminal getting caught in the end.

If you commited a crime where it becomes general knowledge that you commited it, expect to pay for it. There are very few places where you can hide where law-enforcement won't eventually find you (other than your room, which is as well off as being in jail). The solution is not to let people know you "did" it. This isn't CSI, it's not like the Guard can take DNA samples or have cameras in the hallways. The only thing they can really go on are eyewitness accounts of what happened and continually questioning you until they can catch you in a lie (or if there was a murder weapon involved, finding that).

But then there are ways to get out of it once you're "caught" too. I think Yuber is probably one of the only PCs to ever hand all the evidence to the Watch, carve his name into the victim's corpse, mock Gracien during his trial, and still get off not guilty.

[Ryot]

Originally posted by TonyD
I agree!
The criminals SHOULD plan their crimes better. Or if not, plan their arrests better. When the law bursts in, instead of fighting, just @page the watchmember and say "hey, how about we have a long chase, and end up in the courtyard. I really want to take a hostage. Sounds like a fun arrest?"

It's more the criminals responsibility than the watchmans responsibility to plan this out.

By the same token, if after this fun hostage-taking arrest scene the criminal ends up in the dungeons for three months...they're not likely to do it again. Next time they'll genuinely try to avoid the lawkeepers by checking the who list every 30 seconds...

I consider an important part of planning a criminal act to be also planning what clues you'll leave, and how your character can get captured/punished. That's part of the story. Part of your plan might be "I'll escape this time, steal another two things, then when the castle is talking about all the thefts lately, THEN I'll get caught" - and keep OOC records of who the items were stolen from, so the lawkeepers can return the stolen goods afterwards.
If the law is going to be nice to criminal players, the criminals have to do their planning and act responsibly.


1. Planning is essential, but so is co-operating with the other players involved. I learned that through trial and error. Ryot's first truly memorable crime? Drahkkil, Ryot, and another character got ahold of three swords (This was when swords were...ha!...hard to come by.) and attacked the people attending a Banquet.

As it turned out, half the bloody people attending were guardsmen or duelists. It was like trying to rob an NRA meeting.

2. EVIDENCE is fantastic. ALWAYS leave evidence. It's the plot device that gets people TALKING about the crime. If you want some attention for your plot, clues and bits of evidence are the way to go. Whether it be Dolph's hand, a kidnapped person's pouch outside your door (...That ended up with a watchperson following Ryot into his room, where it was easier to knock 'em out.), or a broken condom. Don't ask me where you'd get a broken condom in Marrach; try Quilp?

You always need to look at the bigger picture, if you're a "thug" criminal. If you care nothing about advancement; that leaves you wide open in respect to plots. So, you'll end up in the dungeon for a few moons? Oh, well. The talk about your crime, and your character's new-found infamy are more than worth it.

And - Priam is right about the auto-restraining. MOST (not all) guardsmen/watchmen will avoid restraining you on sight if you're RPing the chase. You CAN escape. Just don't be a tool about it. Remember, they pay for their accounts, so it stands to reason that they also want to get some roleplay out of any given event; which means that they don't necessarily want to just restrain you, and toss you in a cell.

-Greg?

[Shadust]

And - Priam is right about the auto-restraining. MOST (not all) guardsmen/watchmen will avoid restraining you on sight if you're RPing the chase. You CAN escape. Just don't be a tool about it. Remember, they pay for their accounts, so it stands to reason that they also want to get some roleplay out of any given event; which means that they don't necessarily want to just restrain you, and toss you in a cell.

-Greg?

Off topic, and this has probably been discussed multiple times...but why have restrain at all? We're supposed to trust players of the law not to abuse using it, why shouldn't criminal players be trusted to RP fairly?

I'm not a fan of auto-restrain for anything other than a disruptive newlie. It's a power emote and it puts all the power of a given scene into the hands of one PC, while taking it from another, based soley on the type of character they wish to play.

No, I've never been restrained from across the room or anything, though I know some who have. I have, however, been restrained when I've been escorted from the gaol to court. It's just kind of insulting. It's saying, "Shayne, I don't trust you to RP fairly. Even though I've RP'd holding your arms behind your back, I need to put this ooc tool on so you won't suddenly rush at Gracien." Or, "Shayne, we both know Shad has been subdued and arrested, but I don't trust that you are not going to suddenly type 'east' and run to your room."

Trust should go both ways no matter what character you want to play.

[neitz]

I kinda agree with this comment , the person making the arrest could ask 'Do ya mind coming with me ,i have to arrest ya ? we can do it the easy way or the hard way .... or similar words to that effect .

Or even page the player and ask how they want to play it ....

Auto-restrain , if abused .. is a good way of makin people feel they do not have as much freedom to express their characters ideas .....which in the long run restrains not only the characters movements, but also the players creativity and confidence..

[TonyD]

Well, if we have a trusted character, that's worked their way up the ranks (legal or criminal) and will RP properly...I see no reason for restraint. ever.

For disruptive newlies, well, I can see the need.

There's also the question of who decides which way rp goes. If one player is outnumbered by two others, I suppose it's possible that they could still escape. Be that a guard outnumbered by two crims, or the other way around. Still, the "strength" is with the outnumbering people. Does proper RP dictate that the outnumbered person RP's getting caught? If they can escape, will we have a problem where, even outnumbered 2 to 1, criminals always RP that they escape?

Without a system in place, or at least loose rules, this is always going to be a judgement call. The power is definately skewed towards the guards, but maybe *someone* needs to have the power to decide "no, it goes one way or the other".

Also, I assume because the guard characters get restraining powers, they go through RP and training, so they know when it is and isn't appropriate. This means that the players who get these abilities are more likely to be responsible(ish?) players. Anyone can log in and decide to become a criminal. I'm inclined to put my trust (player-wise) more in the older character that's rp'd their way into the position.
Of course, the flip side of this is a criminal who's rp'd their way into their criminal position, and is known to be a responsible player, shouldn't need to be restrained. which leads to...

...in the cases of shadust being escorted, I see no need for the restraint (an angry wife doesn't OOC restrain their husband when dragging him to their room for a talking to) - but a few examples like this don't necessarily mean the system is flawed.

[Shadust]

Well...the way restraint is used now, it's like it is textbook procedure. If you agree to go peacably, IC...you're still restrained. In fact, I don't think I've ever been arrested, for murder or disturbing the peace, and haven't been restrained.

As far as watch/guard training goes, I'm not sure a lot of OOC discussion goes into restrain. I am, of course, completely unsure on this having never played one that went past deputy...but I've never heard of it.

However...and this is important...Almost every single watch/guard player that I have played with I consider to be completely fair. I haven't personally experienced any out and out abuse.

I simply disagree with restrain on -principle-. I don't think it is needed. If people don't RP appropriately, I ignore it. I don't need an OOC tool. And ICly I don't care how much you practice grappling with wrists, you can't put someone in an unbreakable hold.

And if the watch/guard can learn the technique, shouldn't criminals...or anyone else for that matter, be able to?

[Rosalind]

I think restrain should be breakable based on a hand-to-hand combat ability, if not entirely gotten rid of (except for crazy newlies).

The thumbs are the weakest point. If you swing your body around hard enough, heck, even if you can't move your body, you can easily enough get out of a wrist-grip, even a tight one. (*knows from extensive martial training*) Unless you RP full-body restraining them and some crazy stuff like that, it's not realistic at all...

My view on auto-restrain - if you can't find an SG to help you with a crazy newlie issue, go ahead and auto-restrain them to the Gaol. Otherwise, it's a role-play issue.

[Shadust]

Originally posted by Rosalind
Unless you RP full-body restraining them and some crazy stuff like that, it's not realistic at all...


And most of the time it is...

X steps to you

X grabs your arms (maybe)

X twists your arms behind your back

X restrains you

[Shadust]

wow...i'm bad about getting off topic, huh?

[Zhane]

Playing Zhane, and having played a lawtype person in the past, I will attest that quite a bit of OOC training is worked into the procedure.

Now, I'm talking in relation to the past few months in the restructuring of the Watch.

I'm also drawing reference from a few years ago when I first started playing CM, and the watch was still relatively new.

What could have happened in between those times remains a bit of a mystery to me personally.

I will admit though that Zhane and Yaoi have been restrained even in times when it wasn't even vaguely RPed.

X tells you, "Come along peacefully"

You reply, "Ok..."

X restrains you.

But often times this happens in the most outrageous of cases, and is rarely regular practice. From what I have seen most of the lawtype characters are trusting enough to allow some dignity. (IC and OOC)

[Vlad]

I remember someone getting restrained while they were wielding a sword.

Funny, no?

[Lucus]

Just last night a player who had been playing for over a year now refused consent for two law-enforcers to even move within his proximity when the both of them went to restrain him together.

Just another example why we have the restrain ability. You don't have to be a newly to play unrealitically.

Lin

[Ryot]

Originally posted by Lucus
Just last night a player who had been playing for over a year now refused consent for two law-enforcers to even move within his proximity when the both of them went to restrain him together.

Just another example why we have the restrain ability. You don't have to be a newly to play unrealitically.

Lin

Consent-deny all, perhaps?

I'd think that we need a "Guard/Gaol" responsibilities thread. I've brought this up, before (http://forum.skotos.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32306&highlight=restrain), albeit a little less coherently. (I was slightly younger. Eff off.)

We're talking about OUR responsibilities, as criminals. The law can find their own damn threads. <nod>

-Greg?

[Vlad]

It simply becomes a one of those "no quarter given, no quarter expected" situations between criminals and law enforcers as correctly signified by the posts in Greg?'s link. Both players begin to use each OOC trick at their disposal to counter the trick they expect to be utilized by the other party (be it who list scanning, lack of running emotes, auto-restrain, etc). I even remember one of my characters being auto-restrained in the Under in the complete absence of light and being dragged to the top.

It's up to both parties not to let this become such a ludicrous and blatant disregard for cooperative RP. But the players of law enforcers should realize that the criminals have much more at stake.

[John]

Originally posted by Lucus
Just last night a player who had been playing for over a year now refused consent for two law-enforcers to even move within his proximity when the both of them went to restrain him together.

Just another example why we have the restrain ability. You don't have to be a newly to play unrealitically.

Lin
But what was his reason, what did he do IG to support his ability to avoid restraint? I mean if he just stood there and said no, well so be it. But if he turned and foot sweeped someone and then dodged out of the way of the other person. Well we have had PCs and NPCs do exactly this with plots and others pcs blessings (and sometimes without)
Actally I think one criminal used to say "If darvis can do it, so can I."

[John]

Originally posted by Vlad
It simply becomes a one of those "no quarter given, no quarter expected" situations between criminals and law enforcers as correctly signified by the posts in Greg?'s link. Both players begin to use each OOC trick at their disposal to counter the trick they expect to be utilized by the other party (be it who list scanning, lack of running emotes, auto-restrain, etc). I even remember one of my characters being auto-restrained in the Under in the complete absence of light and being dragged to the top.

It's up to both parties not to let this become such a ludicrous and blatant disregard for cooperative RP. But the players of law enforcers should realize that the criminals have much more at stake.
I once got auto restrained to make me move to a diffrent spot on the bridge. I was autorestrained becouse IG I was asking a question that the watchperson didnt want to answer (The leader of the watch that time). If I recall I did assist about it, but it was some time ago.

Often I think its the storys of autorestraint that linger and cause the issues. It only takes one autorestraint story to color a year of RP.

[Ryot]

Originally posted by John

Often I think its the storys of autorestraint that linger and cause the issues. It only takes one autorestraint story to color a year of RP.

Simple, but absolutely correct. I was always the squeaky wheel, because I wanted things to change for the better. I usually went about it in the wrong way, but the points still stand. One abuse from an authority figure can bring about PAGES of bloody discussion, and complaints. If they lead to change; so much the better. If not...well; they're there.

This isn't to say that people -without- authority don't abuse the system. They do, but they have less power to repeatedly abuse it - and their abuse can usually be countered.

-Greg?

[Lucus]

Originally posted by Vlad

It simply becomes a one of those "no quarter given, no quarter expected" situations between criminals and law enforcers as correctly signified by the posts in Greg?'s link. Both players begin to use each OOC trick at their disposal to counter the trick they expect to be utilized by the other party (be it who list scanning, lack of running emotes, auto-restrain, etc).

So why not start by giving people the benefit of the doubt? With the kind of attitude you described above, it sounds like both "sides" (if such a word exists, considering this supposed to be a cooperative game) continue cheating, justifying their cheating with "Oh, the other side must have cheated too". It's a cycle that will keep going on if people don't start sharing some trust.

I've "un-restrained" characters who fairly roleplayed trying to get out of my grasp, only to have them book for their rooms without a single emote the second they were released. I don't use the "who list" at all anymore to avoid OOCly knowing who's "findable" and who's not, only to have people accuse me of cheating for being in the right place at the right time. I've even reported other law-enforcers that I thought may have been cheating when they caught a criminal.

Trust goes both ways.

Lin

[Vlad]

That's exactly what I think should happen. My point was the other extreme.

[Shadust]

Originally posted by Lucus
So why not start by giving people the benefit of the doubt?
Lin

Exactly. So why restrain at all. RP grabbing the criminal. If they don't RP it fairly, assist.

As it stands now, law enforcers have a badge that gives them the OOC ability to stop someone else's movements. Criminals are supposed to give them the benifit of the doubt not to abuse it. If it is...they are told to assist.

Just seems to me we don't need it at all.


I dunno. Said my piece on it.

P.S. As I've said before, 98% of Law people play fairly. I know Lucus for one was IM'd that a wanted criminal was out and about, and he refused to log in just because he knew that. Kudos to people like him. I just disagree with restrain on priniciple.

[Adayne]

Originally posted by Vlad
In my experience, criminals have rarely been given any leeway as to victory opportunities with the exception of when skills are in question. It's widely expected that every plot ends with the criminal getting caught in the end.

Not really. Ada has never been convicted of any crime save one. (A misdemeanor) Infact, she's only been *caught* for one major one, of which she got away with. This was no question of skills.

Ada has quite a few criminal activites under her waist cord.

If your criminal character goes around stabbing people left and right because he feels like it, expect it to be a quick end. There are alot of criminals who have not been caught or convicted (Hell, even -suspected- in some instances) because they didn't do hack/slash/guns blazing routines. Because they didn't act like a thug or run their mouth on the public boards or make alot of enemies. It comes down to how you play your criminal character.

[Vlad]

Originally posted by Adayne
Not really. Ada has never been convicted of any crime save one. (A misdemeanor) Infact, she's only been *caught* for one major one, of which she got away with. This was no question of skills.

Ada has quite a few criminal activites under her waist cord.

If your criminal character goes around stabbing people left and right because he feels like it, expect it to be a quick end. It comes down to how you play your criminal character.

I wasn't speaking of convictions, I was speaking of armed/unarmed confrontations.

[Ryot]

Originally posted by Adayne
If your criminal character goes around stabbing people left and right because he feels like it, expect it to be a quick end.

...unless you're me.

-Greg?

[Howe]

The reasons we have restrain. (NOT auto restraining someone)

OMGirock kicks Idleperson.
OMGirock kicks Idleperson.
OMGirock kicks Idleperson.
OMGirock kicks Idleperson.
/assist "Hello your neighborhood friendly Sergeant here with a newlie that is kicking everyone repeatedly, can you please help with the situation? His name is omgirock and he is in the courtyard (outer)"
OMGirock moves from Idleperson to you.
OMGirock kicks you.
OMGirock kicks you.
OMGirock kicks you.
/consent deny OMGirock
TOO LATE SUCKER! You have been badly bruised!
OMGirock kicks you.
OMGirock kicks you.
You move to the white arch.
OMGirock moves from the large barrel to Othernewlie.
OMGirock kicks Othernewlie.
OMGirock kicks Othernewlie.
Othernewlie has been slightly bruised!
OMGirock kicks Othernewlie.
OMGirock kicks Othernewlie.
Idleperson asks you, "Can you do something please?"
You tell OMGirock "Stop or I will yell stop again!"
OMGirock leaves through the north passageway.
You sigh.

OR the ever popular


You note Criminal.
You point at Criminal, "Halt!"
You stride to Criminal, "You are wanted for eating beans on Tuesday!"
You approach Criminal "It is the slammer for you!"
Criminal dodges left.
You step right.
You extend your hand to Criminal, "I think we need to talk about this bean issue!"
Criminal extends his tognue at you, "Just try to catch me!"
You note south door closed.
You note north door guardedly.
You smirk at Criminal, "I think I already have."
Criminal leaves through north door.
/assist "Hello your neighborhood friendly Sergeant here talking about Criminal who just bolted through a room of people out a door when my character was in arm's length of him, and magically went through north door."
You exit through the north door.
Criminal leaves into his private room.
Criminal logs on alt and watches you wait for Criminal.
You wait.
You wait more.
You paint your fingernails.
You grow old.
You die.
Criminal re-emerges.


I have always tried to play fair with restraint. I always do several actions giving the person ample opportunity to fight, flee, grab, twist, kick.

I have even used it with the first situation I try to RP it out. Sometimes it has come to the point where I have to restrain the newlie. I take the newlie aside to speak with them about the game, and the dynamics of it. If a guide is present I let them speak to them, sometimes they are not. I talk to them, and try to familiarize them with the game, and then release them asthey are new.

I have had criminals slip away, usually a good fight, all out brawl. Most of the time I play I have -not- used restrain, unless it is a high profile criminal. Howe has placed his hand on so and so's shoulder and led them to their cells. Most people cooperate. Some do not.

That is why you have restrain.

[Howe]

Originally posted by silvarilon

And the law will give them the same respect, and plan into the story that the criminal can get away with a certain amount of crime in the interest of making a fun story.

Originally posted by Vlad
:rolleyes: When has that ever happened?

But that's really not what I was speaking about in the first place.



Oh easy peasy lemon squeezie...


Howe got three days to conclude his involvement with the Ansuz plot to 'wrap things up' with the promise of turhing himself in. They had him, the woman he kidnapped, surrounded by people. Later he emerged from his room, was restrained, and still was let to the ceremony that brought back Gareth. After which he did dodge 'the man' to run back to ensure Avaria's safety, let her out, turned himself in.

Lorana wanted to talk to Dionar, and only Dionar while she had Lucus tied up in her room. Instead of auto-restrain, or attacking, or challanging to a duel she was allowed to speak instead to Dionar, and slink back to her room. She later emerged and was apprehended a day later.

There you go. Where plot has overturned arrest.

[TonyD]

Howe, it sounds like those plots are the idea situations of cooperation between the criminals and lawkeepers to make a good story :)

For my interest, how much OOC communication was needed for those to run smoothly?

[John]

Originally posted by Viceran
Amen.

The problem is that people want instant gratification, so their characters sing like a canary rather than grow with a storyline. They take that road because it leads to action right now rather than building up relationships that last and provide entertainment for months at a time.

Consider how many successful characters got where they are through instant gratification versus working the system over a period of time. And when I say "successful character" I don't mean just the ones placed highly on the Chain of Being.

Try picking a side and being loyal to something greater than one individual character (meaning, your own character). I think many people would be surprised what came of it.

The sad thing is, even when you work with people who dont betray you, and make sure everything is IG and even take steps to make false trails, you find that some people dont want to do the work to RP with you, they would rather invent a "magic" way.
At this rate even if you can find thugs or partners or lackys it wont help. Magic can be used to trace things, view into privit places, and even tell if you touched something. So unless you make sure to never be the last person to hold something, never keep something in your room, never keep anything on you, your hosed.

Heck if the rumor/story about being able to tell who used what key in a given lock are true, then only the NPC villans will be able to keep working.