Request: Ransom Mechanism

[neghsmoke]

I read something recently where the dev's mentioned how character kills worked. Seems you can knock a player down then decide whether to finish him off or not. These seems like half the mechanism for ransoming players is already built in. Will there be any way to guarantee, or offer some assurance that upon paying a ransom the character will not be killed? If a mechanic like this was added to the game it would encourage yet anohter of my favorite activities. blackmail.

How about a ransom contract with a bigger alignment hit if you break the safety terms.

Or a NAP that would prevent PKing that character for a short amount of time (enough time to get the fuck out)

Any ideas?

[Scal0]

Need ! ^^

[Xzi]

Can certainly be something player-enforced, but no need to actually build restrictions for it into the game. The idea behind Darkfall is that the players decide how the world is run. That's a sandbox.

[Bojangles34]

I like the alignment shift idea. If you kill him after you said you wouldn't then you would go evil. And if someone is already evil you wouldn't trust giving them the ransom. I don't like the NAP idea. That would make it to strict.

[Realbigdeal22]

I read something recently where the dev's mentioned how character kills worked. Seems you can knock a player down then decide whether to finish him off or not. These seems like half the mechanism for ransoming players is already built in. Will there be any way to guarantee, or offer some assurance that upon paying a ransom the character will not be killed? If a mechanic like this was added to the game it would encourage yet anohter of my favorite activities. blackmail.

How about a ransom contract with a bigger alignment hit if you break the safety terms.

Or a NAP that would prevent PKing that character for a short amount of time (enough time to get the fuck out)

Any ideas?

When someone is knock down,Heal.I dont know wat else.

Heal=rezurection. DFO wont have rezurection when you die i think.

[Selzi]

These seems like half the mechanism for ransoming players is already built in. Will there be any way to guarantee, or offer some assurance that upon paying a ransom the character will not be killed? If a mechanic like this was added to the game it would encourage yet anohter of my favorite activities. blackmail.

How about a ransom contract with a bigger alignment hit if you break the safety terms.

Wow...

Or a NAP that would prevent PKing that character for a short amount of time (enough time to get the fuck out)

This is the most carebear thing I think I've ever seen on these forums.

So basically it'd be like losing some money on death without the death. What a wonderful idea. :bang:

I agree with Xzi, if you were actually being serious.

[Rhynn]

Why ask for some ransom, when you can just kill him and loot his entire corpse clean?

[Mr.LichTwitch]

Ummm. Does FFA PVP ring a bell?

[neghsmoke]

Wow...



This is the most carebear thing I think I've ever seen on these forums.

So basically it'd be like losing some money on death without the death. What a wonderful idea. :bang:

I agree with Xzi, if you were actually being serious.

Im glad you think so, but I must wholely disagree. The entire point of this mechanic would be to add to the experience of PK profiteers (carebear? I think not). In eve-online randsoming used to work for awhile, then players realized that 90% of the time, their ransomers would just kill them anyways (it's what I would do if given the chance) but the real problem is that players lose faith in ransom's, and stop paying them making this impossible to exploit in the long run.

Maybe the guy im about to kill doesnt have time to run back from his bind point, he's supposed to be somewhere, and it's worth more money to him than the equipment on his body (remember equipment wont be terribly expensive if it's full loot) I would be more than happy to offer him a ransom instead of killing im because maybe I dont have the time (or the alignment) to take his crappy gear to the bank anyways.

[Aeros]

I read something recently where the dev's mentioned how character kills worked. Seems you can knock a player down then decide whether to finish him off or not. These seems like half the mechanism for ransoming players is already built in. Will there be any way to guarantee, or offer some assurance that upon paying a ransom the character will not be killed? If a mechanic like this was added to the game it would encourage yet anohter of my favorite activities. blackmail.

How about a ransom contract with a bigger alignment hit if you break the safety terms.

Or a NAP that would prevent PKing that character for a short amount of time (enough time to get the fuck out)

Any ideas?

Pretty sure they have a minute to be incapacitated, and in that time zone they can either be rezzed by a teammate or someone else, or finished off...
When the timer runs out you re-spawn at your last bind stone or w/e they're called
So ransom can be limited to 1 minute, meaning almost minimal to no ransom

[Nabisco17]

Cool idea. If you are just shooting to make some gold, go PK some kids, and let them live for a fee.

A cool way to make money.

[Dash102030]

Reputation is the safeguard against this, man.

If you go around ransoming people and then kill them anyway, word will spread and people will stop paying you to not kill him. If you're actually planning to profit from ransoms, then it's more beneficial to just let the guy live and show people that you are a man/woman of your word.

Now, if you're just being a jerk and don't really care, then all this doesn't matter.

[Redstone]

But if there are thousands of "ransoming-pk'rs" ppl won't remeber that one guy for sure. I like the idea of alignment hit.

[Dash102030]

Oh trust me, they'll know.

[Fudgy_Neeples]

Your idea sucks big ones. The whole point of Darkfall is to NOT have an ingame system which stops the player from attacking anyone else at any point he/she chooses. Please convert to the Darkfall ways or get out.

[Toxic Waste]

I like the alignment shift idea. If you kill him after you said you wouldn't then you would go evil.

... Wouldn't trying to ransom someone be evil anyway? ...

[Ghetis]

So, the scenario the way you have described it would go something like:
You are out in the woods killing mobs and someone comes up and jumps you. You die and tell him that you will give him 100 gold if he will spare your life. He accepts and gets 100 gold from you and if he kills you again within the alotted time he would get a negative alignment penalty.

My question is, if his motivation for not killing you is money, then why would he take your offer and not just strip your cash AND items from your corpse. I mean you are already dead. If he was a nice guy then he probably wouldn't have killed you in the first place.

[Nabisco17]

So, the scenario the way you have described it would go something like:
You are out in the woods killing mobs and someone comes up and jumps you. You die and tell him that you will give him 100 gold if he will spare your life. He accepts and gets 100 gold from you and if he kills you again within the alotted time he would get a negative alignment penalty.

My question is, if his motivation for not killing you is money, then why would he take your offer and not just strip your cash AND items from your corpse. I mean you are already dead. If he was a nice guy then he probably wouldn't have killed you in the first place.

Ahhh

yeah this would be a problem.

[Ghetis]

The plot deepens...

No, its still pretty shallow

[Toxic Waste]

No, its still pretty shallow

And pointless.

[neghsmoke]

They said it's full loot, does that mean you drop all your cash every time you die? doesnt make sense. do you have to deposit gold in a bank? If so this will make the life of the evil impossible. I was under the impression you would drop all loot, but not your gold.

[Dink Toilweed]

They said it's full loot, does that mean you drop all your cash every time you die? doesnt make sense. do you have to deposit gold in a bank? If so this will make the life of the evil impossible. I was under the impression you would drop all loot, but not your gold.

lmao. you were wrong.

Everything on character is lootable. So yeah put your moneys in the bank

[terafis]

So, the scenario the way you have described it would go something like:
You are out in the woods killing mobs and someone comes up and jumps you. You die and tell him that you will give him 100 gold if he will spare your life. He accepts and gets 100 gold from you and if he kills you again within the alotted time he would get a negative alignment penalty.

My question is, if his motivation for not killing you is money, then why would he take your offer and not just strip your cash AND items from your corpse. I mean you are already dead. If he was a nice guy then he probably wouldn't have killed you in the first place.


Would be funny seeing someone type 'please don't kill me i'll pay you', before you kill and loot them.

Actually I've had people say that, specially in shadowbane - cn farmer 'no kill no kill' as they run away. Then you kill them laughing.

[CerusVI]

I think people should need to be "finished" to die after getting incapacitated, otherwise they revive after the timer.

This would work nicely for people wanting to rob people without killing them if you could also loot their corpse while they were down.

To give people who only want your stuff an incentive not to kill you, make the alignment hit be significantly lower if you don't finish them.

[eveningdrive]

Well, what about if the knocked out player gets thrown in a the enemy city's prison, and for x amount of time, he stays there regardless of whether he logs in or not.

I was thinking though in terms of someone else ransoming you (a guild member perhaps?) or a prisoner exchange of sorts.

[natris]

Im glad you think so, but I must wholely disagree. The entire point of this mechanic would be to add to the experience of PK profiteers (carebear? I think not). In eve-online randsoming used to work for awhile, then players realized that 90% of the time, their ransomers would just kill them anyways (it's what I would do if given the chance) but the real problem is that players lose faith in ransom's, and stop paying them making this impossible to exploit in the long run.

Maybe the guy im about to kill doesnt have time to run back from his bind point, he's supposed to be somewhere, and it's worth more money to him than the equipment on his body (remember equipment wont be terribly expensive if it's full loot) I would be more than happy to offer him a ransom instead of killing im because maybe I dont have the time (or the alignment) to take his crappy gear to the bank anyways.

The difference between EVE and DF is that in EVE when you kill someone, you get 1 - 15% of the price of the ship . In DF you get 100%. Why would you ever ransom (for other than roleplaying reasons)? Also you do not have access to bank from anywhere and can thus only hand gold you have in your backpack.

I recommend you to either stop posting stupid not thought out ideas or head to newbie forum. Have a nice day.

[El-Diablito]

In eve-online there's also full item loot, and ransoming is quite common, people ask for the same mechanism there from time to time, but fact is, we don't need it.

If people don't honor their ransoms they'll soon get a reputation for it, and those who do honor ransoms and make money off it won't be overly happy (huge fucking axe style).

We don't need mechanics to govern what the players can govern themselves, the risk of betrayal is part of the sandbox concept.

[Ghetis]

They said it's full loot, does that mean you drop all your cash every time you die? doesnt make sense. do you have to deposit gold in a bank? If so this will make the life of the evil impossible. I was under the impression you would drop all loot, but not your gold.

You only lose everything on your body when you die. If that includes gold then its up for grabs. Bank your stuff to keep it safe.

It certainly does not make it impossible for most evil players. Most people will be part of a guild and quite a lot of guilds won't care if you are evil or not (some might even require that you stay evil) and in your guild city you will be able to use a bank. Evil characters will have a hard time going into capital cities and NPC cities, but not their own clan cities. If you are a solo player then you should think about the consequences before going evil.

Also, how would you offer more money than you had on you as a ransom. If you offer 100 gold then you would have to have 100 gold on you at the time. It would be easier and more profitable to just kill and loot your body than deal with a whiner.

[Uzik]

Good idea.

Nothing was worse than hearing tales of miners paying a ransom in EVE only to be blown up.

Although, I guess you have to take chances when it comes to dealing with pirates/bandits.

[Bobbie]

The difference between EVE and DF is that in EVE when you kill someone, you get 1 - 15% of the price of the ship . In DF you get 100%. Why would you ever ransom (for other than roleplaying reasons)? Also you do not have access to bank from anywhere and can thus only hand gold you have in your backpack.

I recommend you to either stop posting stupid not thought out ideas or head to newbie forum. Have a nice day.

Yes, unless money is universal it is completely not worth it. As he said, in EVE the value of the ship thats not covered by insurance makes up the majority of the cost of the ship and neither player can keep that if they blow up a ship. Thats why you can ransom some guy who most likely has some cash lieing about in their universal wallet. Cannot believe DF is gonna have universal banks.

[Blixa]

If you pay a ransom to somebody, you can be sure he won't kill he. If he wanted to kill you, he wouldn't need your ransom anyway since he'd get everything you have after killing you. No mechanism needed.

[konti]

if you only incapacitate a player you could become less evil than when you kill him. So if you want just a certain part of his stuff, for example a nice part of his armor or weapon, than you could blackmail him and say that you wont kill and full loot him if he gives you this part. So you can win by not getting so much evil alignment and your opponent wins by keeping some of his stuff. If im not a real evil one, maybe i would prefer that method because i can faster get rid of the evil alignment again. I think no more in game machanism is needed, just give more evil alignment for killing than for only incapacitating. Also i think it would be good if an incapacitated player can recover after a certain amount of time, maybe some minutes, so his corpse cannot be looted and the attacker has to make the decision to kill or not. Does somebody know if incapacitated players die or recover after some time?

[terafis]

Hide in the shadows and watch the guy hand over his sword as ransom, and when the victor walks away, run up and kill the guy on the ground and full loot him:)

[Dash102030]

If money isn't universal, there will be some serious problems when you try to buy something expensive.

[konti]

Hide in the shadows and watch the guy hand over his sword as ransom, and when the victor walks away, run up and kill the guy on the ground and full loot him:)

thats bad luck then but dont forget how evil you become for that and that the victor may have taken the best stuff already

[wildcard442]

Well in order for anything like this to work, the ransom of course would have to be for something more than just what the player is carrying, otherwise they'll just be killed and looted. For example, they have like 100 gold on them, but the ransom is for 1,000 Gold (maybe this person is really important, like a clan leader or something).

But then the question is why would anyone pay the 1,000 Gold? Another is how can you enforce that the person isn't killed and the other person is paid?

If it is something else, like say the person has 100 gold and the ransom is for 50 gold, then yes, this is kinda carebear-ish and would never be used, the person would just be killed and looted

[konti]

If money isn't universal, there will be some serious problems when you try to buy something expensive.

banks are universal so you wont have to carry your money from one city to the next. But you have to think how to get the money from the bank to your trading partner. i guess that most trades will then happen near the bank because thats most secure for both parties involved. Also one hast to think twice before running around with some expensive stuff in an unguarded area, especially if others can see it. That wont be an easy live in that world. But that makes it interesting :)

[Silky]

pfft bad idea

[Dash102030]

I understand moving items between places, but having to physically move "gold" between places would be just a pain in the butt and add nothing to the game.

Say you want to buy something that costs 500 gold.

Now, 500 gold is heavy and you can only carry 100 at a time.

That's 5 freakin' round trips to the bank with an inventory full of nothing but gold.

Now imagine if you have a huge logistics chain running. You not only have to worry about moving goods between places but the money itself!

Not to mention if you find a good deal on something, you can't buy it because you left your gold in the bank half an hour away. And if you fight often, you will not be carrying gold on you. So running back and forth to the bank everytime you want to make a purchase will get old very quickly. Hell, this could hurt the shop owners who rely on traveling players to buy things from them. "Man, those are some good deals, but I left my gold in the bank. Better luck next time."

I seriously doubt the currency will be an actual physical object. But if it is, allright I guess we'll all have to adapt.

[Dave_sp!]

I understand moving items between places, but having to physically move "gold" between places would be just a pain in the butt and add nothing to the game.

Say you want to buy something that costs 500 gold.

Now, 500 gold is heavy and you can only carry 100 at a time.

That's 5 freakin' round trips to the bank with an inventory full of nothing but gold.

Now imagine if you have a huge logistics chain running. You not only have to worry about moving goods between places but the money itself!

Not to mention if you find a good deal on something, you can't buy it because you left your gold in the bank half an hour away. And if you fight often, you will not be carrying gold on you. So running back and forth to the bank everytime you want to make a purchase will get old very quickly. Hell, this could hurt the shop owners who rely on traveling players to buy things from them. "Man, those are some good deals, but I left my gold in the bank. Better luck next time."

I seriously doubt the currency will be an actual physical object. But if it is, allright I guess we'll all have to adapt.


Personally I'd think it would be crap if gold isnt a physical object, how could i kill someone and take there gold if its not!

The easy way to do it is make a gold an object but give it 0 weight so you can carry as muich as you want.


edit: Also in UO's system you just needed to have the gold in the bank when buying off players vendors, so in principle they could do something like this instead

[Sunspots]

Unlike in real life, in-game deaths will happen repeatedly will be of little consequence to the victim.

[ARM]

Unlike in real life, in-game deaths will happen repeatedly will be of little consequence to the victim.

^This.^

What is of consequence, though, is alignment hits. While not restricting what a player can do, alignment penalties for killing without offering a ransom, or bigger ones for killing after recieving a ransom payment, would become of consequence once npcs no longer talk with you and players refuse to trade.

It would be like duelling. Giving the player freedom of choice while still implementing consequences is not the same as restricting player actions and I think a lot of people here just can't see that.

Why not give the option to offer ransom, if it doesn't limit what you can do, and could imprvoe the game experience?

[Darkfalz]

I read something recently where the dev's mentioned how character kills worked. Seems you can knock a player down then decide whether to finish him off or not. These seems like half the mechanism for ransoming players is already built in. Will there be any way to guarantee, or offer some assurance that upon paying a ransom the character will not be killed? If a mechanic like this was added to the game it would encourage yet anohter of my favorite activities. blackmail.

How about a ransom contract with a bigger alignment hit if you break the safety terms.

Or a NAP that would prevent PKing that character for a short amount of time (enough time to get the fuck out)

Any ideas?

What an incredibly stupid idea. No.

[zie]

Gold has no weight, you can carry as much of it as you are willing to risk losing.
if you want to ransom someone's crap life then incapacitate and demand 1000 gold to heal them, if they pay - heal them and they will probably try to kill you to get their golds back. I'm pretty sure an incapacitated player dies if hes not healed or finished off after a set amount of time.

Can incapacitated players even talk?

[Jonkar]

Can incapacitated players even talk?

I'm pretty sure they won't be able to talk in /say.

[Ghetis]

Gold has no weight, you can carry as much of it as you are willing to risk losing.
if you want to ransom someone's crap life then incapacitate and demand 1000 gold to heal them, if they pay - heal them and they will probably try to kill you to get their golds back. I'm pretty sure an incapacitated player dies if hes not healed or finished off after a set amount of time.

Can incapacitated players even talk?

I still ask why even bother with a ransom. You already have them dead. Why not just take their gold and their loot and be on your way. Just because there are limited UBs doesn't mean that you will have access to your bank while out in the woods. Any amount that you would be able to pay for a ransom would be lootable from your corpse.

[zie]

I still ask why even bother with a ransom. You already have them dead. Why not just take their gold and their loot and be on your way. Just because there are limited UBs doesn't mean that you will have access to your bank while out in the woods. Any amount that you would be able to pay for a ransom would be lootable from your corpse.

Im saying if he wants to do it, he can - not saying it makes any sense at all

I dont think you'll get any kind of alignment hit for incapacitating someone if they get rez'd/healed in time.

[Sunspots]

No he can't. There is a keystroke for the incapacitated player to respawn on demand.