Player looting

[Brokenbone]

Who knows? Motivations may be "insults... religious conflicts... alignment differences... whatever", but $$$$ going to the victor is at minimum a pleasant bonus, if not a motivation in itself? Or perhaps in cases it is the "real" motivation with a veneer of other ICness, although "greed" is a perfectly legitimate motivation for adventurers to bash all sorts of things and take their stuff, why not a PC?

I am not sure if it's the greed thing sending chills, or the "death by accidental-on-purpose" methods that come from slow healing, "accidents" with AoE spells when partymates can't take one last hit, dishonest "scouts" sending cohorts into the teeth of peril, bar-room braggarts saying there's something wonderful in a cave that is actually full of death (to riff on that "+2 sword... in a cave of basilisks" joke above), etc. There are lots of kinds of "indirect" ways to make other PCs' lives difficult, or over, producing a looty corpse as one of the end benefits, even if 20 other lovely IC goals are being served.

[Audark]

Maybe I'm a naive little child here but I very rarely see CvC, even more rarely see CvC to the point of death, and in those few cases that CvC has plenty of RP loathing in the middle to more than warrant the use of force.

I have seen people discuss 'this person needs to be stopped' but I have never seen a ganged up premeditated CvC in an ambush context. The only time I have ever seen this was for an NPC.

In almost all cases people choose to avoid one another rather than follow a path towards CvC. I just simply do not think anything raised in this thread is common or even likely.

That said, if DMs want more control, there is nothing inherently wrong with that, and I don't care either way. I just don't think all these nightmare scenarios are common or likely enough to elicit a reactionary scripted response. Any kind of abuse in this regard is covered by our rules, and the PA can swing the ban-hammer at folks.

This ultimately comes down to the same kind of discussion we have over and over again. Do we script responses that restrict, if not impede everyone's game? or do we simply punish those individuals who abuse the system?

I am, and always will be, against scripting blanket responses to imagined problems, when those same problems can be easily dealt with on an individual basis by correctly applying the alfa rulebook to individual cases of cheating.

Just my thoughts, my game certainly won't be ruined if we can't loot PC corpses, I just do not like the insinuation that everyone's a bunch of cheating bastards and we need to script responses because we cannot trust our players.

[johnlewismcleod]

Well said, Audark... +1

[Rotku]

Maybe I'm a naive little child here but I very rarely see CvC, even more rarely see CvC to the point of death, and in those few cases that CvC has plenty of RP loathing in the middle to more than warrant the use of force.

I've seen way to many...

[johnlewismcleod]

If this is real (PC's killing PC's to get their stuff), then a simple addendum to the CvC rule should fix it:

No PC that kills another PC will take or keep any items from the dead PC with the possible exception of a single item being the point of the CvC in which case said item and relevancy would be discussed with DM staff before being awarded.

OGR could write something like this up with much better wording, of course, but it seems a simple fix that wouldn't impact PC loot hungry peeps at all...just prevent a hopefully very. very rare event, but one of such gross wickedness it cannot be ignored IMO.

This does undercut thug/highwayman PC's from practicing their trade on PC's, of course, but ALFA doesn't really support that anyway IMO so no harm done.

As for clerics slow to heal...that sucks peanuts and can't be regulated.

I personally had three beloved PC's die at my own clerics feet a while back and it really hurts (and keeps on hurting ). I can't believe anyone would purposely do this unless their god would forbid healing a fallen PC of an opposed deity or something and I would encourage anyone who thinks a player of a cleric let their PC die purposefully to think it through three times before offering the accusation.

Take it from me...it's painful enough for the player of the cleric already.

[Lokan]

I think people are touching on some of the issues that got me thinking about this. I hope no one is implying there are any cheaters in the game, or people are made to be cheaters by looting players... I don't think that it is. And I don't see the rules being broken an issue, because I don't think people do that very often. I just thought that a change would not take away from others fun, but make the other ways people get wealth worth more fun.

Anyway..

Would this be an acceptable practice regarding this issue:

Let's say I'm a DM, and I find out some how that a player died (hopefully the player sent me a PM), the player had been alone, and is not getting resurrected (or even if they might be resurrected). Would anyone think that it would be in bad form to log on gather the gear and make a determination as to what was left, what was taken by an NPC to be used in plots later, and what was destroyed in the fight?

would it be in bad form to ask the players to let me make that determination even though they already looted the player because they got there before me and possibly take away some thing?

What would you think was fair?

[Castano]

+1 Lokan - not bad form to involved DMs. In fact I would support we make it a house rule to PM a server DM upon looting a corpse, so they can handle what you ICly found.

I really think it's very non-immersive to wander around picking up massive loot from very old corpses.... In fact I think I'll make that an MS server rule. Thanks to everyone for bringing this issue up

[Keryn]

Lokan... as it is DMs already pick up corpses. I know this as a matter of fact, when a DM logs in they have ways to know if someone died, in the logs, if someone did they also know where and usually what happens is said corpse is simply picked up. Seen this happen several times.

What this whole thread makes me think is why? I mean you just said it yourself Lokan, that you don't think the situation has led to any abuse. Though here we are with a several page discussion around something that like Aurdark mention has been far from an issue, and once again trying to find scripted solutions to fix a problem that may happen...in the future...

I never ever heard of a case where we had any suspicion that the CvC took place to get someones wealth. Anyone can come forth and please tell me if this ever happened?

So once again the question... Why? What are we trying to fix? fixing something that ain't broken..? meh...

JLM I do not agree with you, for the exact same reasons I pointed out before, I am pretty sure we don't have CvC happening due to wealth hunt, and if CvC does happen the dead PC and his loop are there and should be there for those who did it, what would be the reasoning behind the 1 item thing? It would not only be quite OOC to do it, but it would also be unfair.

I've been part of CvC for IC reasons, the loot from the dead PC was mainly kept by my PC, but many items were given to those that helped my PC in the event. And to this day, my PC still enjoys the glory of having killed a evil and menacing PC, and having profited on it over the situation. Yes it would be ridiculous to be cynical about it, the loot was quite a bonus and reward for the efforts to put down such a hard enemy, and I see no problem in this. I do see a problem if in the end I was forced to pick on item out of it all... So I risked my neck and of my friends, and the reward doesn't match it? And there we go back to the same old question in ALFA where rewards almost never match the risk you took, in a permadeath world where once your dead...

All in all to tell the truth I do not see where is the problem at this moment... DMs do collect bodies and remove the loot, some corpses are found and some PCs do get lucky, CvC is by far not often... And we DO HAVE rules in place against attitudes that have been mentioned along this thread.

And once again I'd point out Audark's post obviously.

EDIT:

In the case Castano mentioned, of old corpses in the woods that would have been looted I agree. Just one small rule would make it quite easy. Each time a PC dies alone in the wilds, the player must immediately PM a DM? HDM? saying where and when and how it happened. From then on its up to the DMs.
Though CvC, and death in a group? I still see no reason to mess with that.

[Castano]

it's not been a CvC issue - there are 2 issues (1) self looting (and making that immersive instead of banned - by simply having the DM say the corspe was picked clean), and (2) making the system more automated so DMs do not have to run and collect a corpse when someone dies...

[Keryn]

Maybe for you not Castano but the start of this discussion was not around those subjects.

If that is the case... I guess a scripted resolution could be made if it is that vital.

Something like, if killed by wolf (just an example, could be any other creature that would not loot the corpse), rolls dice for being looted after X time, and from then every X time, to the point the corpse will be empty.

If killed by creatures that can loot, roll dice and see how much they take...

Though I think it essential do give it sometime from death to first loot if it is not looted at the moment of death, maybe the tie could also be a roll, for shorter and bigger durations. Not sure how feasible this would be but If it is to improve and give more freedom to DMs... I'm game!

[johnlewismcleod]

JLM I do not agree with you, for the exact same reasons I pointed out before, I am pretty sure we don't have CvC happening due to wealth hunt, and

That's quite alright, Keryn...I often don't agree with me either

Discussing through an issue like this is a process for me in which I find my opinion at some point. I haven't played a PC that loots PC's for a very long time and really hadn't given it much thought until now, but if you'll notice Rotku said CvC for loot has happened and more than once. Rotku would know this, where we wouldn't.

CvC even done well is difficult for most players to deal with in a mature and detached manner.

My thought is that if we were to eliminate the possibility that it was done for other than completely IC reasons, then perhaps all involved parties would be forced to understand and agree that it happened for IC reasons.

[Keryn]

Hmm I thought Rotku meant he has seen many CvC's not with the specific goal of looting the toon. But if that is the case I guess I understand!

[Rotku]

Hmm I thought Rotku meant he has seen many CvC's not with the specific goal of looting the toon. But if that is the case I guess I understand!

You read me right. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

[johnlewismcleod]

K...then I flip again and agree with Audark and Keryn. It makes no sense to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

At least I think it doesn't.

At the moment I think that I think it doesn't.

[Blindhamsterman]

you're my hero JLM, it is indeed great to have you back