Loot

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Wintersheart - 10/24/2005  12:57 PM

Simplistic - 10/24/2005  5:07 PM

Why is this topic beginning to sound more like a way to circumvent the rules

Because it is....

After all, the people most interested in it are the people whose interests it is in to fine-tune the accepted etiquette as to looting corpses, especially when someone else was the one that put that corpse there. ^_~

Though another thing... On some servers, there are rules that either a party's leader will gather every last bit of loot, and dole it out evenly, or that d%s will be rolled for loot, or that items will be divided by interest of the players. It's usually one of the three, and I thought it would be a good idea to ask opinions on these as related to Layonara.

Generally, we seem to have a very IC looting etiquette - Whoever gets to it first, gets it, unless someone really had thier heart set on whatever it was. If there's a dispute, the interesting thing to note is that, if there isn't much certainty as to who killed exactly what, the person making the complaint tends to get the item. The thing that comes to mind here is skeleton's knuckles, though usually noone will bother complaining about not getting one knuckle in particular. Silk and venom glands are slightly better examples of this, as silk comes very dear and venom glands, when anyone bothers to get them, almost exclusively go to the harvester.

In any case, I was just wondering if anyone had any thoughts as to general etiquette at Layo as to in-party looting, particularly regarding gold. It's very OOC to think to have something like a Leader-gathers-and-distributes rule would fly with even a quarter of the characters currently running around, so having it understood as general adventuring manners, in game, wouldn't make much sense to me.

I'm just curious as to players' opinions in the matter. Personally, I'd gladly sacrifice some amount of the loot I might get for being too slow, in exchange for staying a bit more true to the nature of things, IC.

And another note, before I finish this long-winded, redundant bit of text: I feel that in things such as thievery, only extreme cases should carry Server consequences (i.e. when it gets to be out of the character's nature). To express the thought I had originally meant to type, I feel that perhaps some PvP should be allowed, if still heartily discouraged. At least one other player who has posted in this thread has expressed a feeling of misalignment with his character's nature when he couldn't simply clock a person he sees as a thief across the face.

To elaborate... And I must apologize for the likely incomprehensibility of this post; I'm being interrupted every two minutes or so. In any case, what I'm saying isn't that, for example, a PK would be permissable on all counts, but that in cases where it is properly IC, it should only carry in-game consequences, rather than Server consequences. Generally, aye, this should be discussed beforehand (and actually it should always be discussed beforehand, but were it suddenly not an instantly bannable offense, certain thieves might be a bit more careful about where they steal from, as there would be that element of danger that they would be facing were this a real situation, not some game with existance-wide rules which were enforced by all-powerful beings of DOOM), but there are situations IC where it makes a great deal more sense for there not only to be-

Gah. I'm rambling, and repeating myself over and over again; my train of thought has officially left the tracks. All the pertinent information I was trying to convey has been conveyed, so... 'Till next time.

[Dark Jester]

Stephen_Zuckerman - 10/24/2005  10:37 AM

After all, the people most interested in it are the people whose interests it is in to fine-tune the accepted etiquette as to looting corpses, especially when someone else was the one that put that corpse there. ^_~

Though another thing... On some servers, there are rules that either a party's leader will gather every last bit of loot, and dole it out evenly, or that d%s will be rolled for loot, or that items will be divided by interest of the players. It's usually one of the three, and I thought it would be a good idea to ask opinions on these as related to Layonara.

---

I'm just curious as to players' opinions in the matter. Personally, I'd gladly sacrifice some amount of the loot I might get for being too slow, in exchange for staying a bit more true to the nature of things, IC.

Most groups that visit places beyond the Red Light caves or the Hlint crypts designate a 'master looter' (or looters) before the first NPC is killed. That person collects all gold and loot off the corpses, and divides it evenly at the end of the adventure. It usually works quite well. On the topic of items being looted, since there is no way to tell what items were picked up off of a corpse, it is pretty much up to the honor system for the looters to share info on what they find. Just make sure to choose a master looter that everyone trusts.

-Jester

[Wintersheart]

Stephen_Zuckerman - 10/24/2005  7:37 PM

Generally, we seem to have a very IC looting etiquette - Whoever gets to it first, gets it, unless someone really had their heart set on whatever it was.

That is not my experience. Normally there is an assigned looter, usually one of the backup crew or archers. When we finish we split the loot evenly. Items tend to be shared on a need basis, if you are interested in it and need it you get it. When people who are not assigned the task loots it usually gets pointed out as being bad manners.

On quests it is tends to be different because the loot is often ignored.

And another note, before I finish this long-winded, redundant bit of text: I feel that in things such as thievery, only extreme cases should carry Server consequences (i.e. when it gets to be out of the character's nature). To express the thought I had originally meant to type, I feel that perhaps some PvP should be allowed, if still heartily discouraged. At least one other player who has posted in this thread has expressed a feeling of misalignment with his character's nature when he couldn't simply clock a person he sees as a thief across the face.

No for a number of reasons. Actions that are or borders on being griefing should have server consequences.
1. Stealing other peoples loot count as griefing. Griefing has severe consequences and quite rightly so. Griefing is not an offence against the other character but against the other player. Hence it should have server consequences.
2. Neither CG or CN are excuses for behaving in any way you want to.
3. Carrying out an action that cannot have consequences isnt good RP - I find that is among the worst RP. PvP doesn’t start at killing, it starts at attacking. When I cannot respond IC (i.e. attack or kill you) you should not take advantage of that.  
4. Griefing or anything that borders on griefing are a sure-fire way of getting arguments, flamewars and further griefing. It doesn't lead to anything good.
5. Like bad practical jokes this is only fun for the perpetrator, not the victim.

To elaborate... And I must apologize for the likely incomprehensibility of this post; I'm being interrupted every two minutes or so. In any case, what I'm saying isn't that, for example, a PK would be permissible on all counts, but that in cases where it is properly IC, it should only carry in-game consequences, rather than Server consequences. Generally, aye, this should be discussed beforehand (and actually it should always be discussed beforehand, but were it suddenly not an instantly bannable offense, certain thieves might be a bit more careful about where they steal from, as there would be that element of danger that they would be facing were this a real situation, not some game with existance-wide rules which were enforced by all-powerful beings of DOOM), but there are situations IC where it makes a great deal more sense for there not only to be-

Again, if you reach an agreement with the other player you can do much more than if you don’t, but even then you can only carry out PvP after getting DM permission.

I play Layo to have fun, most people here do. This topic pops up once in awhile, but it always only considers the rogue perspective. First rule of considerate behaviour is to consider the other persons perspective first, not your own. While it may seem like fun and IC behaviour for a rogue to run around pick pocketing, breaking into houses and stabbing people in the back how many of us would have fun playing the victims of that?

       

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Dark Jester - 10/24/2005  1:47 PM

On the topic of items being looted, since there is no way to tell what items were picked up off of a corpse, it is pretty much up to the honor system for the looters to share info on what they find. Just make sure to choose a master looter that everyone trusts.

-Jester

Aye, but think about in character... If you're watching someone loot a body, you'll usually see what they got, if it's larger than a nickel or so, at least if they aren't trying to hide it. Also, is anyone really going to trust some random stranger who "seems trustworthy enough" to give them a fair share? And even if they do, are they going to be comfortable enough with it to do it consistently?

The thing is, the OOC part of these boards, at the very least, have no direct connection to the in-game world. It wouldn't make sense to say that it's always been a common adventuring practice to do such a thing, when with most characters, it really hasn't. Come to think of it, my question is really mainly unproductive; I'm just curious as to people's thoughts. What has been tradition in game will continue to be, and that is that it's usually determined (whether peaceably and before the adventure or not) with each case.

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Och, people posting more before I finish typing my relpy... Ah well.

In any case...

I certainly understand where you're coming from, Rolf, but I believe I at least tried to clarify that I did not include griefing in the no-Server-consequences idea; there is a difference between following a valid character trait and just bugging the heck out of another player. Regardless, it's my main feeling that everything should be discussed between players as to any sort of possibly offensive or violent action in-game, preferably before the occurance. I've done no small amount of stepping in to help with cleaning up the dungeon floors, myself, but usually the other players had no problem with it, partied or not. On the rare instances they did, I made amends as appropriate. My point is, here, that I most certainly do not feel that I should always be "strongly encouraged" to ask first, simply because a few people have a problem with my character's very in-character actions.

There was a statement about the chaotic alignments not being excuses for acting "however you want to." I certainly agree with this, but I feel compelled to state that while, for example, a chaotic good character may be fundamentally good, that character is not likely to hold personal ethics that are horribly lawful. I.e. as long as it's not harming anyone (as far as one can tell), it probably wouldn't be so much of a problem in certain characters' eyes. The definition of "harm" is also likely to be quite loose, though a CN character might not even worry about whether or not a person was harmed overly much.

The alignments are representations of actual personality tendancies; players exhibit them as well as characters, because CN, TG, etc. are all just labels for certain tendancies in action and thought. Lawful players tend to lay down rules, as one might imagine; Chaotic players tend to be uncomfortable with some of them.

[freemen2]

Varka - 10/24/2005  1:45 PM
Path is right...

Don't you just hate that :p

For the looting, t'isn't debatable folks, LoL, L stated nay, t'is his server, so there isn't much point in keeping on going on about it, heh heh.
Personally would trully love fer this rule to be not there as I've had both kills and loot stolen from me and it would have made my day to just cut off their heads or at least try LoL even if I would have probably died doing it, a few times :p  But it would have been IC to do just that.  But t'is one of the rules here, I enjoy playing here, so I fallow this rule...that's it.
Hell I alianated a few players because they've stolen kills of mine and the only thing I can do IC as say my dwarf: Lokri, is too refuse too party with them as long as they don't "make amends" when Path has no problems what so ever with that PC.  And vise-versa, although some people don't sem to differenciate peoples PCs as being different *shrugs*
And yeah this is a pet peeve of mine as well, when someone is fighting a group of adversary or even one, unless he's near-death, the least you can do is go: hey, need a hand? Don't just barge in and kill whatever that PC is fighting :s

For the loot split, I don't know where ye got that different percentage go to diferent people, but this is the way I'v been doing it since coming on...and it was passed down to me by the folks I first partied with:
Low PC loots and stays alive at all cost else he wont be invited again LoL, looter is picked by party leader At the end of the run together, gold is split evenly, if you don't know really well the people you're with you say: got this and that anyone interested? Else you give what others need/what as you know them.  But looter gets first pick.
T'is the reason he's put there in the first place, he's unexperienced and if he can use items he finds for himself t'is an easy way to get equiped as well as in-group fighting experience.
Weavers get scrolls, rogues keys...etc...this is really basic fairness, folks.  If 2 people want same ressources, they both gather them and then split them at the end of the gathering or it as been said before run starts, that a certain ressource will solely go to someone. You don't like that, you don't go run with them.  

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Two things: One, it seems that the concept of having a person designated as the "looter" of the party is a bit different from what I had been meaning. Two, again I am in agreement with Path on quite a few things; people tend to get what it is they're after when looting, and give up the things that they know someone else needs, for whatever reason.

What I had meant by having a specific "looter" was that one person gets everything, and then doles it out evenly; it's a server rule for parties on some servers. It's quite different from letting a less-experienced adventurer check the bodies, and maybe hand some specific item over to someone who's after it, but pocket the rest. That should clarify a few things...

Usually, if noone's been singled out to be picking up most of the loot, there's still someone who tends to go after it and get the most, in Layo. If the other characters have a problem with it, the conclusion is virtually always to hand over some portion to them. I should remind you, since it's come to mind, that a "party" is an ooc mechanics thing; the characters have no concept of it, they're just travelling together. But anyway, my point here is that there are very rarely problems, because the GENERAL attitude is that whomever gets to the corpse first, gets what it's carrying, if it's not something specifically desired by another character. When there is, there is almost always an IC solution to the situation. The only times there are not are when one player is acting more boldly than the character really should, what with the circle of seasoned adventurers with pointy and painful things at the ready, because unmoderated PvP is against Server rules. THAT is when it should be met with DM-mandated consequences, but I find the very idea of running off to the DM channel because one feels that they're not getting thier share, ridiculous, if they've not already done enough RPing in the situation to display an obvious bit of metagaming.

Let's be honest here... If someone steals your car, do you expect a mystical higher power to intervene and give it back? If you want your belongings back, expect to be very serious in your threats to do violence against another character to persuade that character. As you can't do anything PvP without DM moderation, the entire situation would have to be taken to the DMs if the dispute isn't handled before things get to the point where the characters would come to blows, and that alone would likely be enough to help a conflict along to its conclusion.

Ah, clarification. Feels good to finally be able to state what I'd been trying to for the past few posts.

Quick edit: In short, there should NEVER be any sort of OOC consequence that hinders a character's actions, as the character simply doesn't know about those consequences. No matter the benefit, we shouldn't expect characters to act as they wouldn't. Thusly, I feel that if a situation would warrant PC violence, a DM should be brought in to either approve the situation, or force a peacable conclusion; whichever the DM's personal inclination is towards that situation.

[freemen2]

LoL, war party, raiding party...still an ooc mechanic thing?

Stealing is illegal on this server, which means that anyone designated as looter as a moral obligation to split at the very least the gold looted, you do Haven a few time not only do you know how much gold you'll get at 100gps close but pretty much what kind of items as well.  Same goes fer every other area.  So if a looter happens to be short a few times with players that have been on a while, well his reputation is going to go down the tubes rather quickly.

We've always designated a looter has when yer up front and fighting you don't really have time to do it, plus once t'is done yer busy healing yourself or yer mates + making sure nothing else drops on you in the meanwhile.  So it's a practical thing, first of all.  Plus it gives a wee incentive, if t'is even needed, to keep the neewb alive as he's got our ale money
Honestly, if ye've been running with people on Layo where everyone was "free-looting", change people you run with or you enjoy it this way *shrugs*

If yer just continuing on with trying to have "stealing is ok and if others dissagree then they can just call a DM and we can dice-bag or fight with DM watching" then your just running in loops :s  I personally don't see the point of RPing this and I think DMs have better things to do then watching 2 PCs hitting themselves over the head + t'is something that I could see happening on the spure of the moment, not after having bothered a DM that's on, waiting fer him/her to get where we are and then start bashing LoL.  It's why the no stealing and no PK rules are there in the first place, I believe.  So it's up to who ever, whatever their alignement be, to come to term with that and not do it, whether OOC or IC.

I dont know, maybe you weren't all that clear, at least fer me *shrugs*

[Dark Jester]

Stephen_Zuckerman - 10/24/2005  11:56 AM

Quick edit: In short, there should NEVER be any sort of OOC consequence that hinders a character's actions, as the character simply doesn't know about those consequences. No matter the benefit, we shouldn't expect characters to act as they wouldn't. Thusly, I feel that if a situation would warrant PC violence, a DM should be brought in to either approve the situation, or force a peacable conclusion; whichever the DM's personal inclination is towards that situation.

If I understand that correctly, you are saying that there should be no personal accountability for the actions of your character?

The Player knows what the rules are. If they choose to play their Character in a manner contrary to what the rules are, whether it would be 'In Character' or not, the Player is still knowingly violating a rule and should be fully held accountable for it. See the thread regarding Personal Accountability in this forum for an expanded explanation.

That is the precise reason that evil alignments are restricted on this server. And CN is only allowed after an 'evaluation period'. Many people would use those alignments as an excuse to be Griefers, and that is the attitude that the rules are in place to protect others against. Knowing the Server Rules ahead of time as a Player should deter people from creating characters that will knowingly violate those rules.

Nobody can knowingly create a character that would be the ideal thug/assassin on a server with rules like this in place, and then justifiably complain about those rules restricting their RP. The rules have been in place long before most characters were created.

-Jester

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

I think you may be missing my point, on the bit about what would happen when the loot isn't divided evenly...

Most of the time, there's at least one character who tends to go after the corpses a bit more quickly than others, and they tend to get a greater share of the loot, when there isn't some agreement the whole group has come to about splitting it (In my experience, at least.). And, nine times out of ten, noone really cares enough to even bother bringing it up, though this is again only in my experience. That one other time out of ten, however, the usual conclusion is that the character who'd been getting more, shares (whether at sword-point or not).

What about when the character doesn't share when they have been requested to, you ask? Well, firstly you have to think about the reasons for this. One, the character wants the loot. Two, the PLAYER wants the loot. Three, the player knows that the other characters can't just kill his, because it's against server rules. They don't consider the fact that the CHARACTER knows that there are a few other people there with dangerous objects, who are all telling the character to give a few things up. Now, this just isn't acceptable; metagaming, in addition to just being rude. That's why there are Server rules against it. However...

How will the other characters, who aren't getting what they want, going to be satisfied with the fact that the player of the other character is being punished? Especially seeing as they don't know. And they certainly wouldn't just let the other one walk away, or they wouldn't be so insistent, right?

Usually, the character who's got more than the others will let him or her have, will hand over the loot; problem solved. When they don't, however, it would make sense to have one of the players send a message to the DMs, so that someone could come along and either tell the player to hand the things over, if it is a significantly out of character thing for the character to have held on to the loot for so long, or for them to duke it out, if that would be more appropriate to the situation.

You're right, there shouldn't be any sort of PvP without a DM present... But not having any PvP, even where it would be most appropriate and in character for those present? Totally steals the suspension of disbelief. Personally, I'd be all for allowing whatever PvP the players want, if there weren't going to be those players who would join just to wreak havoc. But there would be, so encouraging DM-mandated PvP in appropriate situations certainly sounds like a good idea to my ears.

EDIT:
And to respond to Jester, I don't think that players should not be held accountable. Far from it; I feel they should play thier alignments properly. A Lawful Good paladin might have no compunction killing a person they see as nothing more than a dirty thief, but that same paladin probably wouldn't unless the other character pushed him/her to it. I'm not at all saying it should precisely be encouraged, but that if the RPing brings things to that point, that it shouldn't be absolutely anathema, either.

[Wintersheart]

Stephen_Zuckerman - 10/24/2005  8:56 PM
Let's be honest here... If someone steals your car, do you expect a mystical higher power to intervene and give it back? If you want your belongings back, expect to be very serious in your threats to do violence against another character to persuade that character. As you can't do anything PvP without DM moderation, the entire situation would have to be taken to the DMs if the dispute isn't handled before things get to the point where the characters would come to blows, and that alone would likely be enough to help a conflict along to its conclusion.

Ok three things.
1. No I dont expect a mystical higher power to intervene if someone stole my car, but that is hardly the point. The point is that if someone stole my car in real life I would have a choice how to act, in Layo I don't.  
2. IC I and also Jacchri and others have been very serious in our threaths, but knowing there was no PvP the other players ignored that and continued their behaviour. I seriously doubt that making serious threaths would be enough. Plus IC do you think a high ranking cleric of a goddess of destruction would bother making threaths to a thief?  
3. Anything that borders on griefing will lead to arguments and bad blood. I you have to bring in a DM to handle your rogue actions you are already on a slippery slope (plus quite frankly I would consider that wasting DM time).

Quick edit: In short, there should NEVER be any sort of OOC consequence that hinders a character's actions, as the character simply doesn't know about those consequences. No matter the benefit, we shouldn't expect characters to act as they wouldn't. Thusly, I feel that if a situation would warrant PC violence, a DM should be brought in to either approve the situation, or force a peacable conclusion; whichever the DM's personal inclination is towards that situation.

In short I think this is, with all due respect, a misunderstanding. NWN has game mechanics. The magically appearing bodies with ready loot is pure game mechanics. If your rogue runs past and quick-loots then he is in fact taking advantage of game mechanics. In "real" life he would have to carefully search a body perhaps finding something of worth, but definately taking time. Secondly Layo has rules that OOC affect our behaviour. Those rules are there for a reason, but still OOC affects IC actions as it is. So both gamemechanics and OOC reasons affect behaviour as it is and while the character might not know the OOC reasons, but I sorely hope the players do. So in Short:

There ARE always OOC reasons and consequences for IC behaviour

I don't doubt you can handle this sort of behaviour in a PnP campaign with friends you know. I do however serioulsy doubt that all players here can handle it in Layo. Playing Layo with strangers and online friends is different from playing PnP with school buddies.

Oh OOC I would like to praise you for remaining civil and keeping a good tone. Even when responding to a grumpy sod like me

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Oh, I understand, and don't doubt that noone's opinions or practices here have been changed at all by this conversation, but the discussion did clarify quite a few common stances on things in Layonara. You mentioned the metagaming "Haha, server says you can't follow through with your threat, so I'll ignore it!" bit that I also am rather irritated with, and my whole suggestion about bringing in a DM to possibly moderate PvP was headed towards lessening that, y'know? After all, if one can respond to that touch of metagaming with "Really? Well, Ogz is right over there, and says it's perfectly permissable for a Paladin of [insert Law god here] to kill a particularly unruly thief in this instance, so hand it over," then that could cut down on some of the more reckless things quite well. But regardless, server rules are server rules, and my suggestion was merely a case-by-case bending of them to encourage what should really already be going on.

Anyway, you're totally welcome for my conduct... I learned the hard way a long time ago that being uncivil in an argument is a good way to make absolutely sure no good can come of it.

And yes, I realize that my suggestion likely won't fly at all, but perhaps my urging to stay In Character, even in the recognition of death threats by others, has reached at least one less experienced RPer today. ^^

EDIT: (I realize, often too late, that I forget the compliments I had intended to include...) To be honest, you've not been as grumpy as you're implying; you've been as civil as I have been, and I burned about 15xp's worth of effort keeping myself cordial and not getting frustrated with my own lack of communication skills. xD Not to mention the fact that I've seen some crazy flaming on other NWN places... Stuff that would turn even your average T2er into a gibbering mass of offense.

[Dark Jester]

Stephen_Zuckerman - 10/24/2005  1:15 PM

EDIT: (I realize, often too late, that I forget the compliments I had intended to include...) To be honest, you've not been as grumpy as you're implying; you've been as civil as I have been, and I burned about 15xp's worth of effort keeping myself cordial and not getting frustrated with my own lack of communication skills. xD Not to mention the fact that I've seen some crazy flaming on other NWN places... Stuff that would turn even your average T2er into a gibbering mass of offense.

I hope my comments weren't viewed as flames or anything. They certianly werent intended like that.

I do hope my final point was understood though.

1. Person X comes to Layonara.
2. The rules say "No Stealing from Players".
3. Knowing that rule is there, The person creates a Rogue type character that 'In Character' would be willing to steal items.
4. The person then complains about the 'No Stealing' rule, and tries to bend/break it to justify what their character 'would do'.

It just doesnt make sense to me. It's like asking permission after you've been ordered not to do something and done it anyway.

-Jester