AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

I still, of course, vote for 'Make it vs NPC Only and hope that players start being reasonable and allowing it to happen with consent and inter-player interaction'.

So, wait. Just because a "majority" of spotters aren't based on the stat that spot pulls from, it means that should become more difficult all around?

IMO, an Epic (Whatever) means that it pulls both from base skill and stat bonuses. What you're saying is that someone is an Epic sneak while having 10 dex.

You mentioned that it has a 25% chance on a regular high spot, non-wisdom based character. What happens when it comes to the High Spot Wisdom char? Drops to 0%?

The +5 difference in DC counters the general -5 that any defender is going to get. If you actually break it down, the PickPocket is still in the lead against 90% of people.

Hell.

Against the sheer majority of the server, if someone put the feat in, they'd be able to pickpocket anyone who wasn't a Dedicated Epic Spotter without a chance of being caught, assuming they're a bit careful.

Now, the different in ability modifier between a Focused and Non Focused is typically 13 (Focused Ability gets to +13 to +15. Unfocused is typically +0).

The +5 to the DC, as you see, isn't that major considering it's to exist for the Non Wisdom Builds to habe a chance. Wisdom Builds will still be beaten 25% of the time by average.

That said. It's impossible to balance perfectly. Hence, I stick to the gun that says "Remove it; It's a griever's tool and breaks our rules 'legally'"

WonWon wrote:

That said. It's impossible to balance perfectly. Hence, I stick to the gun that says "Remove it; It's a griever's tool and breaks our rules 'legally'"

Remove the capability to attack other players, it's a griever's tool to become hostile and attack me when all I want is to cuddle and hug people all day.

Try and maintain -some- realism, you're looking for a world where everyone holds hands and dances in circles in the meadows. Negative things -are- allowed to happen to people's characters, simply removing abilities isn't the way to go about things.

I understand how it is seemly unfair. But this is like saying a AA is unfair to a weapon master because the AA can hit me from far away. It is meant to be unfair it is the special area of skill that pc has trained in. Just I would rather see more pcs have pp then doing umd and tumble dumps. Also hey someone might have to spend some points in their spot skill instead of just doing these dumps.

I agree with you, Won. But I'll have to stick to my gun; Give me a rebuild after removal. Even after doing that, you can add a script that delevels anyone who takes more than 4 ranks in it. (Because some new players won't know.)

I also have to agree with Lasci. In my opinion, Amia is slowly being turned into the Sims: Faerun Edition.

Better Sims: Faerun Edition than Old Cordor: Nuclear Playground.

There's been no firm move towards abolishing PP against PCs entirely. The discussion that there has been in the topic has been concerned about better handling of it. So that when something negative does happen to a character, it's not irrevocable and you have better recourse to recover your stuff from a pickpocket. Without that, people are likely to stay on the defensive and therefore have mostly safe, neutral or positive character experiences.

In a nutshell, take the barbed wire off the fence and people might bloody climb over it and like the other side.

Selmak wrote:

Better Sims: Faerun Edition than Old Cordor: Nuclear Playground.

No way, no how. It's dull as a beige suit. I think the reaction of people towards the idea of losing only gold from their precious inventories has demonstrated how absurdly protective people are getting.

Altering the system to dice bag RP also assumes that people will put aside their preciousness and allow someone to win against them. I remain highly suspicious of the effectiveness of this.

If it's just gold, I don't see any issue at all. It gets harder to pickpocket the same person repeatedly, so even the fat blind loaded fool is gonna catch on eventually when the skinny kid dressed in black keeps accidentally bumping into him.

I'm all for 'bad things happening' to my character, but pickpocket is one of the poorest ways ever to implement it.

Lascivar wrote:

WonWon wrote:

That said. It's impossible to balance perfectly. Hence, I stick to the gun that says "Remove it; It's a griever's tool and breaks our rules 'legally'"

Remove the capability to attack other players, it's a griever's tool to become hostile and attack me when all I want is to cuddle and hug people all day.

Try and maintain -some- realism, you're looking for a world where everyone holds hands and dances in circles in the meadows. Negative things -are- allowed to happen to people's characters, simply removing abilities isn't the way to go about things.

Negative things are allowed to happen to people's characters. Hell, this is why we removed the "You can't ignore other people's RP at a whim" rule and also have all of our Player vs Player rules possessing the caveat "If you brought it upon your self; tough luck"

However.

This is a game. OOC / Player Fairness is a consideration that must be made. A one-way mechanic that allows a person to take something from someone else, while there is a lack of said availability being open to everyone else, is indeed a flawed and unbalanced system.

If there were ways for Joe Fighter to take things from someone, without consent, should the situations be in his favour - then I'd be fine with it. Absolutely. Hell, I'd even encourage a harsher, more powerful Pick Pocket so people watch their goods the same way that thief is going to be watching his HP.

However, Pickpockets are the only group who get this privilege, one that is even against our own rules. Hence I remain staunchly against it.

And what about using unbuffed ranks?

IE 1d20 + Pickpocket Ranks vs 10 + Spot Ranks (+ Mods) ?

Heavily favours the defender. I love it, but I imagine the Pickpocket wanters won't.

Obviously unbuffed spot ranks as well, and probably a bit of tweaking with the bystander etc mods. I never like the amount of skill ranks you get from items in Amia anyway. If I'd made DnD you'd never be able to increase it say more than 33% above the ranks you actually bought.

Lascivar wrote:

Remove the capability to attack other players, it's a griever's tool to become hostile and attack me when all I want is to cuddle and hug people all day.

I think the better comparison would be "remove the ability to loot other player characters."

Dev Disco wrote:

Obviously unbuffed spot ranks as well, and probably a bit of tweaking with the bystander etc mods. I never like the amount of skill ranks you get from items in Amia anyway. If I'd made DnD you'd never be able to increase it say more than 33% above the ranks you actually bought.

In DnD, Typically, items don't stack with eachother. And the highest mods are about 10 or 15.

Anyway.

I can't think of a way to make it even remotely balanced. Either everyone has a chance of being able to keep their stuff, and spotters have absolute security. OR. Only spotters have any amount of security, and everyone else is free, riskless game.

Well, it's a matter of common sense. What do you think is more important? Surroundings or spot? I think surroundings makes for more fun. Pay attention to people around a target, make sure you're not seen, etc. I could give a modifier for day/night as well.

If Surrounding becomes the primary factor, then people will simply use it (as they should) and make sure the factors are always in their favour.

Which of course will result in grumbling because, lo and behold, now people don't even need to invest in a skill to be immune to their I Steal Without Consent ability.

Grmbll... well, make some good roll that takes the middle road between raw ranks and surroundings. Make sure the d20 is a decent risk factor.

How about;

PICKPOCKET

not

I use 30 and 15 as modifiers, because they fall in line (roughly) with the 30 skill points that may be put into the skill (33, actually, but I like rounder, solid numbers)

Below is simply demonstration of outcomes, DCs, and percentile chances. The above is all you need for the mathematical 'look' at things

Terms used below;
Thief. Assumed to have 33 ranks in Pickpocket.
Joe. Assumed to have 0 ranks in Spot.
Hawkeye. Assumed to have 33 ranks in Spot.
(for a bit of flavour/fun)

Thief is always assumed to have 33 ranks in pickpocket for these exercises.

Attempt to pickpocket Joe.
Joe is alone, has not caught a pickpocket earlier, Thief has not been seen.
Number to beat; 50.
Chance; 83% of Success.

Attempt to pickpocket Joe.
Joe is with two buddies, or has previously caught a pickpocket. Thief has not been seen.
Number to beat; 80.
Chance; 53% of Success

Attempt to pickpocket Joe.
Joe is with two buddies, and has previously caught a pickpocket. Thief has not been seen.
Number to beat; 110.
Chance; 23% of Success

Attempt to pickpcket Joe.
Joe is with two buddies, and has previously caught a pickpocket, and has seen Thief.
Number to beat; 140.
Chance; Impossible

Even when the situation is stacked against the thief, he has a chance, but it's damn slimming (the last being an example that Thief should pick a different target). Let's try it against someone who knows what they're doing, Hawkeye.

Attempt to pickpocket Hawkeye.
Hawkeye is alone, has not caught a pickpocket earlier, Thief has not been seen.
Number to beat; 83.
Chance; 50% of Success

Attempt to pickpocket Hawkeye.
Hawkeye is with two buddies, or has previously caught a pickpocket. Thief has not been seen.
Number to beat; 113.
Chance; 20% of Success.

Attempt to pickpocket Hawkeye.
Hawkeye is with two buddies, and has previously caught a pickpocket. Thief has not been seen.
Number to beat; 143.
Chance; Impossible

Attempt to pickpocket Hawkeye.
Hawkeye is with two buddies, and has previously caught a pickpocket, and has seen Thief.
Number to beat; 173
Chance; Impossible.

Hawkeye, when in favourable circumstances, is completely immune. In unfavourable circumstances, it comes down to a game of Raw Luck, since Thief's and Hawkeye's skills are matched.
In anything but pretty-bad circumstances, Joe is a pretty vaild target.

(( Tons of edits for readability, format, and shininess ))

The one, notable flaw I see in the above is that Warrior Bob who dumped into Pick Pocket without any dex ability has the same chance as Thief who is actually a roguey-rogue.

IMHO, A withstandable casualty in the aim for a slightly-fair/balanced system.

I'd support it if it added ability modifiers. That way Joe Fighter who skill dumps PP suffers just as much as Bill Sorceror who skill dumped Spot.

But I would also suggest making it noted on the forums that Skill Focus: PP is not used on Amia at all

I can't see a viable way to include it without throwing things pretty wonky (since that means the majority of primary pickpocketers are getting a +13, whereas the sheeeeer majortiy of defenders don't have a direct counter to it other than situational factors)

Last edited by Yurell on Sun, May 31 2009, 9:47 AM, edited 1 time in total.

WonWon wrote:

I can't see a viable way to include it without throwing things pretty wonky (since that means the majority of primary pickpocketers are getting a +13, whereas the sheeeeer majortiy of defenders don't have a direct counter to it other than situational factors)

That's the benefit of picking a skill that is your focus. People can wear wisdom gear if they like, and this is a direct 10% shunt against people that just grabbed a level of rogue for PP, Tumble and UMD.

Even if it were just half ability modifier it would be good. Saying that Bob with 6 Dexterity is as nimble at PPing as Joe with 40 just sounds wrong.

Gear isn't counted into it, period. Granted, I could always tweak the starting number from 50 to 30. Thus a dex-based PC has a better chance, still (since their starting number would have effectively changed by +3 compared to the original, no abilities counted, calculation). But that just seems silly.

Well, then 6 and 28 sounds almost as stupid.

If you add half the ability modifier, it would mean that the thief has an extra [(28-10)/2]/2 = 4.5% - not broken at all*, and they've gained the benefit of their nimbleness.

*Assuming I haven't stuffed up the equation between this and doing physics

I like WonWon's d100, no items roll. Looks good! However, I also would like to see ability modifiers in there.

Even the entire DEX mod ... that's what, +15? So a very skilled PPer could pick just as well if there is one bystander as Joe the Fighter without bystanders. That doesn't seem unfair. Of course, we are all very skilled PPers, but it's an addititional 15% with the d100, a +3 on a d20. Dunno, but that doesn't seem to break anything. Otherwise, just assume a +10 DEX mod, i.e., make the base DC 60. That would still cut out Joe the Fighter, and leave things pretty much the same for your average PPer, slightly disfavoring low-levels that only have a +5 mod yet.

Regards, Ts

Simply use teh raw ability mod as well?

WonWon wrote:

A one-way mechanic that allows a person to take something from someone else, while there is a lack of said availability being open to everyone else, is indeed a flawed and unbalanced system.

No way. It's the very point of different classes and skills. Aw shucks, my fighter can't cast fireballs, let's remove the spell from casters too because else it's unbalanced!

PP is blocked on most MP servers and it's implementation has been a source of frustration for admins and devs. That should suggest something is indeed wrong.

Dev Disco wrote:

Simply use the raw ability mod as well?

Raw modifier would tame it a bit as most are in the range of +8/+9 advantage to the Dexy thief or Wise Spotter. I assume you meant the raw ability mod of both, yes? I like the D100 scheme Wonwon put forth. Good work really in coming up with that.

Dev Disco wrote:

PP is blocked on most MP servers and it's implementation has been a source of frustration for admins and devs. That should suggest something is indeed wrong.

has not Dev crit been blocked in many other servers as well? I suppose that suggests it is wrong?

anyways, I really wonder how many Pickpockets their truly are anyways? it seems that there is way more then there actually is. But ron's suggestion is somewhat intersting. I do not have a PP charachter so i do not care for the most part.

Dev Disco wrote:

PP is blocked on most MP servers and it's implementation has been a source of frustration for admins and devs. That should suggest something is indeed wrong.

I'm not arguing against the removal of the original PP system, but the removal of player-player PP altogether.

Jan wrote:

WonWon wrote:

A one-way mechanic that allows a person to take something from someone else, while there is a lack of said availability being open to everyone else, is indeed a flawed and unbalanced system.

No way. It's the very point of different classes and skills. Aw shucks, my fighter can't cast fireballs, let's remove the spell from casters too because else it's unbalanced!

Stop being a twit. You know exactly what I mean.

Of course, for the masses, I'll elaborate;

Classes and skills having vastly different abilities, skills, traits and techniques is indeed an important part about having this variation in character components. Adds an amount of fluidity to the game, as you need to consider not only your own strengths, but someone elses, and the weaknesses of both. Much like a game of chess.

However. As typical for a game, there are 'universal' bindings (typically for game balance, or fairness, or simply to smoothe out gameplay). For example, no class has the ability to let you have two individual rounds of combat per turn; because a standard combat DnD mechanic is that each character gets 6 seconds (or one round) a piece in a cycling manner, giving everyone an equal shot to act and react in time.

One of these mechanics on Amia, is the inability to mechanically inflict a negative penalty on another player unless direct player consent is given. The absolute worst you can do is PvP them, which does no incur any item or XP loss (despite IC expectations) and indeed has no expense of a player's resources against their will beyond 'Time'. (And even still, the rules require that the player be given an IC out from the combat)

Pickpocket, does not follow the above mechanic, as it does permit you to inflict a penalty upon another character without their consent; taking or removing a resource, and gaining it yourself.

That said, when this gets added, I'm assuming it will be classified as a form of PvP; thus must respect PvP rules (and local PvP Settings as a result).

WonWon wrote:

Pickpocket, does not follow the above mechanic, as it does permit you to inflict a penalty upon another character without their consent; taking or removing a resource, and gaining it yourself.

Well gee, that's what stealing is all about. D&D a game of give and take, of rock-paper-scissors. High PP beats low spot, high spot beats low PP. Any class can inflict a penalty on another character, stealing is just one way to go about it. I can cast level drain on a thief, what is he gonna do? Find a way to get rid off it. Likewise would I have to find a way to get my stolen stuff back. You're doing the overprotective players an undeserved favor by being so tolerant to their complaints.

If the tool/gloves/whatever have a feature whereby you can retrieve your money from the dead body of the picker without even needing a throwaway rank in the skill, then I suppose I can't grumble too much.

I assume/hope it's a fairly simple matter to assign a Has_Stolen_This_Much_GP_From_PlayerA variable to the thief upon a successful dip.

I like that d100 spot system, it looks good but I must agree that dex/wis mods should come into the equation somewhere.

And yeah, I don't really see the need in catering to people who seriously miss a little bit of gold from their inventories. I'll regularly go through 3-6 thousand gold worth of items in a single pvp session, replicating spells my class doesnt get for free.

I chose rogue, so I don't get to cast spells. I need spells to be valid in pvp so I lose gold on scrolls etc. Joe chose wizard so he casts spells but I get to pick pocket him, so he loses gold. *shrug*

And people who choose to take SF or ESF: pick pocket along with 33 skill points are sacraficing a huge part of their builds, thus reducing their performance in other areas. I don't see what all the fuss is about, gold is so easy to get.

I have another idea to throw into the fray.

Rather than letting PP be an auto-win if the pickpocket has high enough ranks, why not make the DC adaptive depending on the situation?

In other words, if it's crowded with guards and being spotted is a distinct possibility a pickpocket will only try and lift something that takes just a moment. On the other hand a really good pickpocket might be skilled at creating distractions for spotting types, and can roll against against a higher DC - same risk, but for a better reward.

This means that the skills of both victim and pickpocket are used and there's always a chance that a pickpocket will get too ambitious and get caught, or that ambition will net them a decent prize.

More importantly, it rewards both spotters and pickpockets for investing points in their respective skills (or on gear, if that comes into the equation) without favouring either one.

This won't be the most morally correct post, but to add to what Vaylek wrote.

Joe Fighter can run the Spires, competing for Amia's lap time record and trying to break it. He can make plenty of gold within little time.

Bob Mage can also run the Spires, going AFK while his summon kills things off, perhaps not as fast as Joe Fighter but has has absolutely no use for Heal potions or anything of the sort because he can hide in GS, and thus sheerly makes profit. (Or alternatively dump wails on most groups.)

Pissy PPer can attempt the Spires, he can slowly spam stealth if he has HiPS, and take down one mob at a time, without Dev Crit (most likely) and this is going to take a while. He can clear it, with a reasonable build and enough time given (a -long- time) but poor Pissy PPer has no chance of competing for Amia's lap time record.

Pissy PPer comes back to Cordor, and steals 7.5k gold from Joe Fighter, and Bob Mage each, thus making himself a tidy sum of 15k gold, what you might sell one item for.

Don't take Pissy PPer's money away. You will make him sad.

Selmak wrote:

I have another idea to throw into the fray.

Rather than letting PP be an auto-win if the pickpocket has high enough ranks, why not make the DC adaptive depending on the situation?

In other words, if it's crowded with guards and being spotted is a distinct possibility a pickpocket will only try and lift something that takes just a moment. On the other hand a really good pickpocket might be skilled at creating distractions for spotting types, and can roll against against a higher DC - same risk, but for a better reward.

That sounds really bad to me. Why should the DC change depending on how high your PP skill is? That'd be like the kobold caves scaling to CR 30 encounter when an epic walks in.

^^ Above poster does have a point
*shrugs*
I just like to kill pickpockets when I catch them. You can be pickpocketed in Cordor I think? But you cant attack the thief?

I am getting boooooored by now. Final suggestion in my PM box, Won Won?

Roger, Willco.

Yurell wrote:

That sounds really bad to me. Why should the DC change depending on how high your PP skill is? That'd be like the kobold caves scaling to CR 30 encounter when an epic walks in.

If you're highly skilled, you can take more chances and probably will to justify the ranks you have spent in said skill. If you want to be a small-time pickpocket who lifts the occasional purse then you don't need to take so many ranks.

The difference between petty street crime and what goes on inside of a dungeon is that player character marks on a street tend to have widely differing degrees of skill/ability. You can either make use of the fact that not all your marks will be the same difficulty for a fixed DC, thereby actually getting some use out of the skill ranks that have been invested, or not. Your choice.

I never said it was a good idea, just that it addressed the problem with Spot ranks becoming irrelevant. Every rank in Spot would decrease the potential value of a pick, if the pick has instead a fixed statistical risk to attempt.

While Won Wons D100 system has merit it still assumes that the Thief will have maxed PP. This is not really that likely. If buffs from gear, feats and spells are ignored then I would bet all the tea in China that there will be just as much PPing after the change as there is now.

There is very little now. Where's our petty crime dammit! It's something interesting aside from dull romance RP and smug god-syndrome warbling; it's SOMETHING INTERESTING! Make it possible!

Your petty crime is waiting for you to put the effort in and work with the DMs instead of being an arrogant 'tard to them, typically.

WonWon wrote:

Your petty crime is waiting for you to put the effort in and work with the DMs instead of being an arrogant 'tard to them, typically.

Won, do you have any reply to the half-ability modifier? It's only a 4.5% swing, but it does seem reasonable to request that a more dexterous character can PP better.

In the PM I sent Disco, it's slightly adjusted and now includes Unbuffed ability modifier (typically going to be +7 to +9 for pickpockets), with only a +5 to the DC (55 base instead of 50).

So Dexers are slightly (2 to 4%) better off than before, while Fighters are slightly (5%) worse than before.

Sounds good

WonWon wrote:

Your petty crime is waiting for you to put the effort in and work with the DMs instead of being an arrogant 'tard to them, typically.

right... i guess I know where I stand. Please don't call me a retard, that's offensive on a few levels.

New (?) pickpocket rules

Who is online