AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic - Betting, or placing bets and odds in amia

aurelius311 wrote:

The only way it would be considered twinking, i think, is if epic character A engaged in a ridiculous one-sided bet with their friend's lowbie character B, basically making up an IC "reason" to give the gold to from A to B.

Which would seem to suggest that we DMs have to babysit your gambling RP, too.

So, do we?

Yossarin wrote:

aurelius311 wrote:

The only way it would be considered twinking, i think, is if epic character A engaged in a ridiculous one-sided bet with their friend's lowbie character B, basically making up an IC "reason" to give the gold to from A to B.

Which would seem to suggest that we DMs have to babysit your gambling RP, too.

So, do we?

One of the reasons I want the nice DM elephant stamp either saying we can without limit, can with limit or can't.

If the bookie acts like a bookies then DMs shouldn't be needed. For example, if character 'A', some one the bookie doesn't know well, walks up and says "I want to bet 1 million that that fella wins in this battle", a battle the bookie doesn't know much about, a bookie would say some thing like; "Who are you and what are you talking about? I don't know anything about betting" and then walk away making a note that character A should be watched with suspicion.

A real bookie isn't going to take a huge bet unless they know all of the variables involved. Taking a bet when the bookie knows it is a fix should get a legitimate bookie in a huge amount of trouble. No one would want to use them again and mobsters would come knocking with more 'legitimate' fights to run bets on.

Of course there is a solution to this... maybe some kind of regulatory body?

I'm quite amazed at how some players manage to make an issue out of nothing.

There's been lots of betting on Amia in the past, without any issues surrounding it.

Craig mentioned common sense. Is the playerbase asking for the DMs to babysit them through everything, as they themselves lack the basic capability of coming to reasonable conclusions?

Don't assume so much Mago, I wasn't saying there needs to be DM run regulatory body. Far from it. Most of the betting that has been done so far has been simple; 'I bet you 50 gold he wins?', 'Deal', 'He won! I get 50 gold, Yay!'. That is simple, effective and dull.

However, if the odds are upped then large scale Twinking is a legitimate concern. I think that may have been one of the concerns people are having with a more complicated betting system. That is when it comes back to Bookies being realistic insofar as odds and bets taken goes.

EDIT: No one add an inane comment about how they bet the GNP of China on which snail could run slower. The aforementioned '50 gold' bet is relative to the amount a person can afford to lose. I'm sure you wouldn't accept a 10 000 gold bet at 100 to 1 odds if you didn't know all the variables.

In the end, Yurell's pretty nice. A definitive, "This is allowed." or "This isn't allowed" kind of thing is kind of essential, in this case. There haven't been problems yet, sure, but it's certainly something that I could see being a problem. When there's no real ruling, one DM might see it and think it's fine, then another might come along and go, "What's this? That's twinking! *takes all the gear*".

That last part is sort of the focal point, btw. Given the harsh punishments for twinking, it's pretty necessary to know when something gray is or isn't.

Yes, allowed.

Go have fun, for goodness sake! I'll be placing my own bets in the coming gambling event, I'm sure, with my lowbie.

If in doubt, always ask DM. We don't want to create a set system for you, because we don't want to spend time on nitpicking when we could spend that time creating ambiance. Most twinkers know very well what they are doing, and it is hard accidentally breaking the rule.

If you think it might be twinking, don't do it.

And you can have fun betting without putting up crazy amounts. Just because you have ten million gold doesn't mean you have to bet ten million gold.

Thankyou.

Thanks

Keep in mind betting rules should be considered the same as Auction rules, you can not bet against your own characters, or with your own characters if another of your characters is taking bets.

All bets should be out in the open and bookies should reserve the right to kneecap those who cant pay up

Crowsterf wrote:

All bets should be out in the open and bookies should reserve the right to kneecap those who cant pay up

Hang on, shouldn't it be a rule to show that you can pay up first? Otherwise lowbie A can bet 100k (a large amount for them, nothing to an epic), and if they win they gain a ridiculous amount of gold.

Yurell wrote:

Crowsterf wrote:

All bets should be out in the open and bookies should reserve the right to kneecap those who cant pay up

Hang on, shouldn't it be a rule to show that you can pay up first? Otherwise lowbie A can bet 100k (a large amount for them, nothing to an epic), and if they win they gain a ridiculous amount of gold.

Thats a good idea yes, but im but one DM and am not going to be making rules out of the blue.

ICly.. if you cant pay up well there is an interesting avenue of rp to take

Crowsterf wrote:

Yurell wrote:

Crowsterf wrote:

All bets should be out in the open and bookies should reserve the right to kneecap those who cant pay up

Hang on, shouldn't it be a rule to show that you can pay up first? Otherwise lowbie A can bet 100k (a large amount for them, nothing to an epic), and if they win they gain a ridiculous amount of gold.

Thats a good idea yes, but im but one DM and am not going to be making rules out of the blue.

ICly.. if you cant pay up well there is an interesting avenue of rp to take

That's sort of why I as after a DM team rubber stamp on what is acceptable, that way one DM doesn't say one thing which is different to the beliefs of another and OOC problems ensue.

Ive been thinking about this topic over the past couple of days quite a bit.

Lets forget the whole legal issues and such that have been brought up with the whole pg 13 or whatever stuff, this is not relevant as its been said before, its not real money, laws like this dont apply at least not in any country i know of (perhaps japan i hear they have some funky gameling laws).

The main issue here seems to be the twinking rules.

Well as long as the Odds are against the gambler (not the bookie who is obviously going to be in a situation to beable to pay the odds, or they are a realy stupid bookie) I dont think this imposses on twinking rules at all.

Players (like in auctions) shouldnt beable to place bets on bets where another of thier characters either placed a bet or are taking the bets, because like in an auction this would be considered Muleing.

Appart from those simple to follow guidelines i realy dont see an issue with it as Craig said above.

As ive seemed to agree with craig a bit on this i do have this to add...
If you feel that a DM stamp is needed on something i fully suport your right to say so, if the DM's have a look and say its not needed so be it, but its not a waste of our time its why we are here.

This does come under the Common sence clause.

Speaking of common sence my grandpa alwys tells me this....

"If you cant afford to lose you shouldnt gamble, if you can afford to lose you dont need to."

Crowsterf wrote:

This does come under the Common sence clause.

Speaking of common sence my grandpa alwys tells me this....

"If you cant afford to lose you shouldnt gamble, if you can afford to lose you dont need to."

Been a long time since I have heard truer words spoken.

The other side of it is the problem of collecting on bets. That is to say how does one go about taking the money from a player who has placed a bet? This is a real issue as it is mechanically impossible to remove the pledged monies from the better.

So, what do you do if a player places a 100 000 gold bet, loses, and then denies the bet? Or kills you and says 'Now stay away' and considers the matter closed. This undermines the entire process and will lead to the position of 'bookie' becoming untenable.

Screen shots are an option but they do not always work. I know I can't take them at all thanks too their crashing of my laptop and I'm sure DMs have better things to do then witness every bet.

If you walk into a bookies in real life, or go to a casino what exactly do you?
You place your bet with your money, you hand over your cash to be viable for the bet. Same applies here, the only issue is if the bookies do not pay out, thats another risk you take with gambling whether or not the person you are dealing with is legit.
If they are not it is an IC action not an OOC one, deal with it IC. I figured this was common sense again guess not.

The Incognitos wrote:

The other side of it is the problem of collecting on bets. That is to say how does one go about taking the money from a player who has placed a bet? This is a real issue as it is mechanically impossible to remove the pledged monies from the better.

So, what do you do if a player places a 100 000 gold bet, loses, and then denies the bet? Or kills you and says 'Now stay away' and considers the matter closed. This undermines the entire process and will lead to the position of 'bookie' becoming untenable.

Screen shots are an option but they do not always work. I know I can't take them at all thanks too their crashing of my laptop and I'm sure DMs have better things to do then witness every bet.

How is that different to the demanding bandit RP? Pay on gold and emote paying the rest?
It is why I suggested proving that you can pay first, and perhaps screen shotting (or everyone handing the money over before the competition and then being paying back).

Mr Mago wrote:

I'm quite amazed at how some players manage to make an issue out of nothing.

If someone doesn't pay up, then deal with it ICly.

Why would you want to take an IC (re)action OOC?

Mr Mago wrote:

I'm quite amazed at how some players manage to make an issue out of nothing.

If someone doesn't pay up, then deal with it ICly.

Why would you want to take an IC (re)action OOC?

Because ICly you'd be able to belt the crap out of them and take it.
*Shrugs* It is something to deal with ICly, though, I just don't like the idea of lowbies going and betting 100k they don't have, and if they win (say on a d6 dice roll) walking away with 600k at level three purely legit.

As an odds maker, you always have the choice of denying certain characters to make bets.

Craig deathwalker wrote:

If you walk into a bookies in real life, or go to a casino what exactly do you?
You place your bet with your money, you hand over your cash to be viable for the bet. Same applies here, the only issue is if the bookies do not pay out, thats another risk you take with gambling whether or not the person you are dealing with is legit.
If they are not it is an IC action not an OOC one, deal with it IC. I figured this was common sense again guess not.

You are thinking of wholly organised and legitimate bookies. The best way to become a powerful bookie is to have people owe you money. This will not be the case if they pay you out right away. There is always the betting against option; i.e, they place a 1000 gold bet, if they win they collect 100 000, if they lose they owe 10 000. However, what you want is to have people with a little money owe you big money.

The Incognitos wrote:

Craig deathwalker wrote:

If you walk into a bookies in real life, or go to a casino what exactly do you?
You place your bet with your money, you hand over your cash to be viable for the bet. Same applies here, the only issue is if the bookies do not pay out, thats another risk you take with gambling whether or not the person you are dealing with is legit.
If they are not it is an IC action not an OOC one, deal with it IC. I figured this was common sense again guess not.

You are thinking of wholly organised and legitimate bookies. The best way to become a powerful bookie is to have people owe you money. This will not be the case if they pay you out right away. There is always the betting against option; i.e, they place a 1000 gold bet, if they win they collect 100 000, if they lose they owe 10 000. However, what you want is to have people with a little money owe you big money.

Why would a bookie want that... thats just bad buisness.

People who owe money and cant pay up are not an asset to any bookie, they are a liability thats why people get kneecaped and such its a message to others to either beable to support your bet or dont bloody bet at all.

Silly Monkey

Those people that get kneecapped can't create magical balls of fire or be sent off to collect magic crystals that can make a bit of metal spontaneously burst into flame.

Everyone has a use if you think about it, getting them to be useful for you is the tricky bit.

It's quite simple, actually.

Since players get emotionally attached to their characters, they also care for them.

Inflicting damage or other means of character regression will cause the players to sympathize with their characters, sharing the emotional pain they experience.

Just like in real life, you try to avoid the pain.

Hence. It can work rather well, with most characters, to propose a true potential threat when the character in debt doesn't pay up.

EDIT: Also...

... what's the point of becoming rich in a fictional, alternative non-existing interactive role playing world?

So what if you don't get those 10'000 gp. Go kill a few mobsters and sell some loot. Problem solved.

Mr Mago wrote:

... what's the point of becoming rich in a fictional, alternative non-existing interactive role playing world?.

Exactly! That's why it is more fun to have them in debt to you then to actually give you the money

The Incognitos wrote:

Mr Mago wrote:

... what's the point of becoming rich in a fictional, alternative non-existing interactive role playing world?.

Exactly! That's why it is more fun to have them in debt to you then to actually give you the money

Precisely, lets face to not sound cliche, gambiling is a gamble. Its a game of chance, you might win the money, you might not. Ive had pcs lose money and then be flat broke. It sucks, but you move on. If a lowbie(which i dont know many lowbies with hundreds of thousands of gold pieces) makes a bet and they cant pay up, the should expect an ic reaction. And again ill say it if you dont want to take the risk of any and all outcomes, Don't Bet your Money.

One of the things i really dont understand here is why people are going immediately to a twinking/rule breaking issue? I guess i kind of understand the argument but really, why lay a negative on something that hasnt broken the rules? Lets enjoy something that can add to the flavor of rp! Let us not automaticly assume that someones going to break rules and run amock. I can imagine there are people who enjoy this sort of thing, the thrill of winning and the agony of losing a sum of money(myself included). THat is really in the end the fun and thrill of the gamble, at least in my opinion.

Last edited by Yurell on Tue, Apr 14 2009, 18:35 PM, edited 1 time in total.

xdrone561x_XC wrote:

The Incognitos wrote:

Mr Mago wrote:

... what's the point of becoming rich in a fictional, alternative non-existing interactive role playing world?.

Exactly! That's why it is more fun to have them in debt to you then to actually give you the money

Precisely, lets face to not sound cliche, gambiling is a gamble. Its a game of chance, you might win the money, you might not. Ive had pcs lose money and then be flat broke. It sucks, but you move on. If a lowbie(which i dont know many lowbies with hundreds of thousands of gold pieces) makes a bet and they cant pay up, the should expect an ic reaction. And again ill say it if you dont want to take the risk of any and all outcomes, Don't Bet your Money.

One of the things i really dont understand here is why people are going immediately to a twinking/rule breaking issue? I guess i kind of understand the argument but really, why lay a negative on something that hasnt broken the rules? Lets enjoy something that can add to the flavor of rp! Let us not automaticly assume that someones going to break rules and run amock. I can imagine there are people who enjoy this sort of thing, the thrill of winning and the agony of losing a sum of money(myself included). THat is really in the end the fun and thrill of the gamble, at least in my opinion.

The reason I'm worried about twinking is because a lowbie can bet tens of thousands of gold that they do not have, so they have no 'risk', and just get a massive payout if they do win.

Edit: But apparently this isn't a problem

Yurell wrote:

The reason I'm worried about twinking is because a lowbie can bet tens of thousands of gold that they do not have, so they have no 'risk', and just get a massive payout if they do win.

ok i can see your point on this but again thats the gamble. If the tables are turned and they lose, then they have to face the consequences. And most of these types of situations where betting is involved usually has a dm watching or involved in someway, so i wager if something seems fishy or out of place, the dms will immediately drop the hammer.

I'd say most of the people that really twink don't through all this complicated stuff to do it. It's more like slap a 100,000 on a friend so he can buy potions and be on his merry way.

Sure it might happen but really not enough to worry about.

OK, coming back to common sence, if you feel the bet in question is a bit iffy just either check with a DM before that said bet or dont do it. This goes for the better and the bookie, if in doubt ask *firm nod* then your covered.

Betting, or placing bets and odds in amia

Who is online