Salem :: The Legislature

[Shiroberus]

I posted something like this a year ago... But only with sheriffs and stuff.

[staxjax]

I posted something like this a year ago... But only with sheriffs and stuff.

It wasn't really a year ago, but found it buried on page 20.

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1310

As you can see, there was actually no content in the OP itself...hence the reason is was soon forgotten amongst all these other great idea threads.

[Nikixos]

just like a trade system implemented in-game, i bet the developers would call this an anti social feature which people think it's actually a social feature

[staxjax]

tbh, I don't think people understand what a 'sandbox' game really is. You don't need **** like this built into the game, you can just get people together and do it yourself. All you need are your imagination and a bit of roleplaying hocus pocus and you can have yourself a grand ole time if that is what you really want. So yeah, putting rules in place so that everybody has to follow your great idea would be retarded.

[RuneNL]

I can see where this would cause some interesting things to happen. Raiders could kill their own alts off for extra money if the bounty gets high enough. Rangers wouldn't have to build trust that they won't kill the people they were hired to help. It would all be a little less sandbox. I'm not sure if I like that.

Pretty much blows the idea out of the water for me. Not taken the typical warrior alt into account.

So yeah, putting rules in place so that everybody has to follow your great idea would be retarded.

And that, was the response i was expecting in the first place.
Board location: Ideas & Innovations: Mine's just an idea.

Ah well, no point in saying whats already been said countless times.

[Caak]

...

I can see where this would cause some interesting things to happen. Raiders could kill their own alts off for extra money if the bounty gets high enough. Rangers wouldn't have to build trust that they won't kill the people they were hired to help. It would all be a little less sandbox. I'm not sure if I like that.

Maybe it would be a solution to creating raider alts: When a bounty is placed on a Raider - every alt of the account would be considered as a gang member and would also have half of the bounty sum on his head - and a criminal wouldnt be able to get the bounty money.

[Dallane]

...

I can see where this would cause some interesting things to happen. Raiders could kill their own alts off for extra money if the bounty gets high enough. Rangers wouldn't have to build trust that they won't kill the people they were hired to help. It would all be a little less sandbox. I'm not sure if I like that.

Maybe it would be a solution to creating raider alts: When a bounty is placed on a Raider - every alt of the account would be considered as a gang member and would also have half of the bounty sum on his head - and a criminal wouldnt be able to get the bounty money.

Wouldn't really work

[dageir]

tbh, I don't think people understand what a 'sandbox' game really is. You don't need **** like this built into the game, you can just get people together and do it yourself. All you need are your imagination and a bit of roleplaying hocus pocus and you can have yourself a grand ole time if that is what you really want. So yeah, putting rules in place so that everybody has to follow your great idea would be retarded.

The consequence of total sandbox would be the elimination of "Boston", which Im all for. Let players make cities if they so choose.

[kruskdamangled]

...

I can see where this would cause some interesting things to happen. Raiders could kill their own alts off for extra money if the bounty gets high enough. Rangers wouldn't have to build trust that they won't kill the people they were hired to help. It would all be a little less sandbox. I'm not sure if I like that.

Maybe it would be a solution to creating raider alts: When a bounty is placed on a Raider - every alt of the account would be considered as a gang member and would also have half of the bounty sum on his head - and a criminal wouldnt be able to get the bounty money.

Wouldn't really work

Maybe, maybe not.

You could prevent someone from claiming a bounty on a character from their own account.

Another thing would also generally making ALL said characters vulnerable to tracking and possibly stuff like it not actually being a crime to attack ANY of them or what not. At least, not in the sense that other people could track you for a crime. Maybe they could still do it, but not anyone else.

Another obvious measure would be abridging access to Boston/Whatever the town is called on a server. I've played other games that do that and it hurts. That could maybe be limited to one character, who knows.

It might also be interesting to have someone with enough notoriety start becoming directly identifiable as a criminal on the mini map, or perhaps be "voted" as a Bad Egg by people they gank, thus contributing to this. Like how you can indict people in Dark Souls. (Except that it's not ultimately bait for more PVP, but bad.) This notoriety would also possibly make players with appropriate law enforcement skills increasingly able to get a fix on their general location, kind of like dowsing.

This might also be a way to arbitrate that "not a crime to mess with them thing". If someone gets enough accusations (which could only be filed after actual criminal actions) they are not legally protected anymore.

A really zany idea might be to have a mechanic which allowed "detectives" or wronged parties (singly or collectively) to set NPC law enforcement/bounty hunters on especially bad offenders, or for people who are criminals to have a small, but increasingly large chance to randomly run into NPC's like that who want to kill or apprehend them. (Messy, but better than potentially allowing corrupt player cops with special powers they abuse.)

Again, these are just ideas.

[Dallane]

so what happens when my crafter account kills a bounty on my combat account?

Dem flaws