AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

762 wrote:

No. It's stupid.

On one hand you push people to do it, and on the other you penalize them for doing it. That's colossally dumb.

Pick one or the other and go with it, please.

It's called "High Risk = High Reward"

I don't think you've played very many other games that allow you to respawn then, because the idea of "Go alone = all loot for yourself, but dying and needing to respawn/etc means you lose a lot" is pretty much the universal standard in all games.

The biggest reason not to do it however is Timezones. Not everyone has the luxury of partying.

Uncap?
Hello Bank PCs :D

If you start muling your gold to alts, you will quickly find that you have no gold, which is 90% more tha the 10% you'd loose in a respawn...

Mind that we can track gold on PCs.

I'm sure Dramaic referred to non-hunting PCs who run a banking business, though. Too bad there's no real investments you could make to be able to pay interest, too.

Mr Mago wrote:

The proper method would be to reduce the loot drop % when solo'ing, actually.

TormakSaber wrote:

So people solo longer for the same amount of money, RP less and hunt more to keep up the goldflow.

I said it was the proper method to address the inflation.

I didn't say it was the proper method to address retarded player mentality.

IronAngel wrote:

I'm sure Dramaic referred to non-hunting PCs who run a banking business, though. Too bad there's no real investments you could make to be able to pay interest, too.

Indeed.

"Don't want to lose your precious millions of gold by accidentally misplacing them while out on adventure?

Give them to Prescia Gemfinder, for a minimal fee, and your precious gold will be as safe as ever!"

The rise of the Banker will also bring about the Rise of the Con Artist xD

Hello Drama.

I can just imagine the OOC strife if someone tries to bank 500k or more and the other person just walks off with it.

The OOC drama factor is something we all think should not be considered, because we all hate OOC and would never raise a fuss OOCly over something that happened IC.

Yeah right.

Nekhy wrote:

The OOC drama factor is something we all think should not be considered, because we all hate OOC and would never raise a fuss OOCly over something that happened IC.

Yeah right.

The fact is the money would be effectively stolen ICly with no way of getting it back ... I'm sure the impossibility of regaining the gold is the thing that would upset people more than the fact that it's been ICly stolen.

Sarcasm failz on the intranetz.

Well...you can always get it back.

Grab a DM, kill the bastard, take the gold.

Make some system (Maybe part of the job system?) that creates a widget called "(Charactername)'s account", and that widget holds the number of gold given to the banker. The banker cannot use the money themselves, but gains a small portion (0.5%? 1%? Make it adjustable by the banker? Be sure to allow potential clients to see it before agreeing) as their fee when the money is deposited.

It still is a risk with your money, as the banker may still run off even without the incentive of profit (In which case he is an ass) or not be online when you wish to withdraw. However, it would increase player interaction, give another interesting career path to PCs, and let hugely rich people (Read: Anyone with more than 1 million Gp) have somewhere to store their spare shinies.

Bankers who are often online and are well known ICly and OOCly will become popular choices for those wishing to store their wealth, and these people could use their status in game to invest in certain things (Eg, a banker PC might convince his/her clients to give a portion of their funds towards a new Inn or a similar money-making venture, and if it succeeds, the supervising DM could add a small amount of cash (0.01% or similar) to all accounts held by the banker. If it fails, make each account lose that amount). Bankers may begin attempting to fight off competing banks, each group offering lower fees or special deals, while striving to create bigger and better investments to please clients.

It would be the economic equivalent of a melee.

Kinda like modern day credit-card companies and banks.

And there's always a chance that a swarm of angry clients will seek revenge on the banker who invests poorly.

I approve of this.

P.S. If you want to make it REALLY interesting, add something that allows a banker to charge 1 percentage step (Eg, from 0.5% to 1%, or 1% to 2%, whatever fee options are given to bankers, just go one up.

) higher than what he says he is charging IF he succeeds a bluff check. (Making sure the bit that tells the client what the fee is DOES NOT tell them that they're paying slightly more. That's what the bluff is for.

)Means people will put ranks in bluff, and adds a touch more risk when dealing with unscrupulous bankers.

Edit: Also, if the thread wasn't off topic before my post, it sure is now.

Edit again: Also, if worst comes to worst and some ass does just walk off into oblivion with all your precious shinies in his account widgets, never to visit Amia again, then they could be recoverable by DMs, who could either just give you back the amount of Gp recorded by the widget (Dms can peek at the inventories of offline characters, yes?) or even better, set up a hidden spot somewhere on one of the servers, with a series of clues leading to it, making getting your gold back a neat little event.

Of course the above is kinda unreasonable, because the DMs are stressed out enough as it is. But still, I think its a neat idea.

Very_Svensk wrote:

I raise people. I do. I find it courtesy to do such. I know that i myself, have a crappy internet, and many other do. Wireless is the devil.

Ditto.

IronAngel wrote:

It's not illegal though, is it? What Ron is talking about, that is: waiting for a reset of the same server and then logging in.

I thought it's pretty much standard procedure. If you die alone, you log off for the night and get a raise some other day.

Ditto again.

Zanthair wrote:

personally, if I die while soloing, I typically will not play on that character for the rest of the day. Maybe even longer, as my play time is severely gimped. Reading wonwon's post makes it seem that its illegal for me to log off after dying to wait for a reset sometime in the future to get a raise in entry.

clarification?

Yeah!

Nathera wrote:

I agree with Mago and 762. I have in the past tried to raise everyone and anyone in the entry because well, I thought it was the polite thing to do.

Ditto again.

Mr Mago wrote:

Then it's official.

The vast majority of Amia's players have probably violated the unwritten rule of being raised in the entry.

Shame on you.

*Blushes Crimson* B,b,b,but,...

The Incognitos wrote:

This respawn/raise after reset thing does need to be made really clear. So far we've had a few DMs say in this thread that it is not just bad form, but outright wrong. If apperaing in the entry way dead is going to earn overlord anger points it really should be made a rule.

That said, it would be a damned harsh rule.

I agree with him *points*

Yossarin wrote:

Selvec Darkon wrote:

More annoying is when people just log off server A to get to wiltun on server B, instead of using a boat or a charge on their wand.

Oooo, guilty as charged. I've done that because I'm too lazy to walk the distance it takes and hate "wasting" a charge only to be told I cannot port to A because it is full. Also because my mind works like a writer's: you don't need the nonsense travel time in between, just the point A and the point B.

I like it, though. I think I'll stop doing that, too, because it is rather OOC.

To be honest, I am guilty of every example of metagaming you have stated here in this thread. *Gulps*

Personally, I agree with the hardcore RPer’s, there are several exploits that –DO-privilege the agitators, those that will exploit no matter what; unless you make harsh rules and enforce them, it will never stop.

That said, my personal infringements have been ignorance, or perhaps negligence, in that I was too eager to read the rules, or to visit the forums, I just wanted to play.

‘PLAY’ being the operative word, after a long day at work, after a tiring session at the gym, after ALL the IRL stuff for the day has been done, I like to ‘Escape’ here for a few hours and immerse myself in a carefree, magical world of adventure.

I am quite ‘New(bie)’ here on Amia, having discovered it purely by accident when my previous server went down, and has not since returned. For me, Amia was only going to be a temporary thing, but I actually prefer it here.

I think both Old and New players that visit Amia for the first time, should be given some leeway for ‘infringements’, some gentle guidance, rather than sever punishments per se.

That said, I am learning and slowly some of my ‘Toons’ are becoming involved in more and more RP, developing characters, learning skills and –at least I think- becoming an asset to the general community of this fantasy world.

Personally I think ‘Spread the KAMA People’, why make what is essentially a difficult progression curve more difficult.

I know no one likes a wise ass, but everyone appreciates a ‘Raise’ now and again and for that reason I will afford people with the courtesy of a raise, whether OOC or IC, in fact I carry bucket loads of raise dead scrolls for that very reason,....Spread the Karma!!

Garnith wrote:

I am.
So.
Confused.

If I raise a corpse in the entry, is that bad?
Is being a corpse in the entry bad?

I don't even know anymore!

Me too *hmpf*

Nekhy wrote:

It's not a rule in the sense the PvP and muling rules are rules, so anyone who's been doing it isn't being punished for doing it.

That is not to say it absolutely will not become a rule, or be otherwise prevented at some point.

You lot think your confused about what to do with your dead body? Imagine how the undead feel at the moment.

Mr Mago wrote:

"Don't want to lose your precious millions of gold by accidentally misplacing them while out on adventure?

Give them to Prescia Gemfinder, for a minimal fee, and your precious gold will be as safe as ever!"

I was thinking also of money orders in denominations of 1,5,10,20,50 millions; widgets that are transformed into gold when you use the item. That should sit nicer with everyone as you can convert to cash anytime.

Yossarin wrote:

Someone get to work on opening up other bank branches or increasing the insurance rates for the ACTF.

What Yoss said.

Nekhy wrote:

The OOC drama factor is something we all think should not be considered, because we all hate OOC and would never raise a fuss OOCly over something that happened IC.

Yeah right.

This is the kind of reason why PC bankers aren't nescessarily the most likely. However: It is possible if you can find players whom have the qualities and level of activity that can be trusted with such ability and responsibility.

Warrick as a Bursar whilst not exactly a banker was essentially tasked with the obtaining of investments to benefit Cordor (mostly this manifested in direct donations) and also was asked at one point to pay for any services the Temple of Love project gained, such as materiel and he would be repaid by Xaviera for it. (in coin and all fairly above board).

This is the kind of thing which is doable, just you need to have a good set of guidelines to determine who can be trusted with such.

There are other options to this as well, I won't detail them but do a little sniffing, they're there.

PC Banking would not be an option, outright. At least not script-supported unless it was a DC request or something. That's my opinion.

The only thing that would work would be a banking NPC (just modify the current item storage system). It is not prone to risk of OOC drama and is always available to players if they get online and go to the NPC.

Whereas players are prone to human greed and the OOC drama is inevitable and will -NOT- be avoided, at all. I don't see Disco jumping the gun to help players keep their already massive hoards of gold, so you can pretty much write off the possibility of banker NPC's or PC's.

That said, don't touch the respawn punishments. They're at a nice balance as it is and we don't need a reason to piss off players by forcing them to lose millions of gold every time they die. It's far too easy to die in this server (especially for people who aren't as familiar with the game mechanics as others) and this whole notion of party = immortality is downright stupid.

That said, this conversation will die out in a matter of a few days only to be brought back up in another 2-3 months, with the same fervor and ridiculous rantings.

Jyro X wrote:

That said, don't touch the respawn punishments. They're at a nice balance as it is and we don't need a reason to piss off players by forcing them to lose millions of gold every time they die. It's far too easy to die in this server (especially for people who aren't as familiar with the game mechanics as others) and this whole notion of party = immortality is downright stupid.

How would someone be unfamiliar with the mechanics after playing enough to earn more than a million? Is it that easy to get money on Amia? And if so, why hasn't anyone told me about it!

Garnith wrote:

Jyro X wrote:

That said, don't touch the respawn punishments. They're at a nice balance as it is and we don't need a reason to piss off players by forcing them to lose millions of gold every time they die. It's far too easy to die in this server (especially for people who aren't as familiar with the game mechanics as others) and this whole notion of party = immortality is downright stupid.

How would someone be unfamiliar with the mechanics after playing enough to earn more than a million? Is it that easy to get money on Amia? And if so, why hasn't anyone told me about it!

Money is crap-easy to get on Amia. You don't even have to kill a single monster to make millions.

Nekhy wrote:

Mind that we can track gold on PCs.

How do you do that, btw? I mean, PC's exchange gold here and there, transactions and stuff nonstop... Would't that be weird? How would pc's be able to trade with pc's ?

Very_Svensk wrote:

Nekhy wrote:

Mind that we can track gold on PCs.

How do you do that, btw? I mean, PC's exchange gold here and there, transactions and stuff nonstop... Would't that be weird? How would pc's be able to trade with pc's ?

I'm not going to explain how, and we don't watch every transaction done by players, but let's just say that PCs starting to use banking mules is easy to track down.

So... you want to remove the gold cap on respawn to make people lose gold and not respawn so often...and then add a mechanic that saves people from losing their gold once again so respawning is a non issue once more?

Seems kind of redundant, as the result of no gold cap on respawn + banking would be the same situation as there's now, just with more hassle.

There's no plans here, just speculation.

IronAngel wrote:

I'm sure Dramaic referred to non-hunting PCs who run a banking business, though. Too bad there's no real investments you could make to be able to pay interest, too.

I can think of one. You could loan money (although no more than 20k) to a lowbie character to allow them to buy gear, and expect them to pay back a greater sum when they reached a higher level.

Or you could loan money to higher-level characters who want to bid on items they can't afford.

Nekhy wrote:

Very_Svensk wrote:

Nekhy wrote:

Mind that we can track gold on PCs.

How do you do that, btw? I mean, PC's exchange gold here and there, transactions and stuff nonstop... Would't that be weird? How would pc's be able to trade with pc's ?

I'm not going to explain how, and we don't watch every transaction done by players, but let's just say that PCs starting to use banking mules is easy to track down.

::Goes to archive his banking mule::

::Shifty eyes::

But hey, won't that make it kinda weird. If you have like a zillion Gp, and happen to pick up a gold coin somebody else owned, winch was previously owned by you, won't that make the entire zillion gold hoard "marked as muled" ?

Dramatic_Prince wrote:

Mr Mago wrote:

"Don't want to lose your precious millions of gold by accidentally misplacing them while out on adventure?

Give them to Prescia Gemfinder, for a minimal fee, and your precious gold will be as safe as ever!"

I was thinking also of money orders in denominations of 1,5,10,20,50 millions; widgets that are transformed into gold when you use the item. That should sit nicer with everyone as you can convert to cash anytime.

Problem with that is that it defeats the entire purpose of removing the gold cap in the first place.

Jyro X wrote:

That said, this conversation will die out in a matter of a few days only to be brought back up in another 2-3 months, with the same fervor and ridiculous rantings.

Well perhaps instead of letting it die out you should make sure there is some kind of definite closure, so you could tell someone two to three months down the line 'no, we've committed ourselves to this solution which we think is fair' instead of wading in again with the same arguments.

If these kinds of topics don't have some kind of reasonable conclusion, people are going to stop caring about reading them, or even the whole forums. You want to be verbose? Then back it up with action, otherwise quit wasting our time.

Yurell wrote:

Problem with that is that it defeats the entire purpose of removing the gold cap in the first place.

You assume the DM staff after instituting a cap that would grant such an item.

Sounds like something a NPC should handle for a nominal 10% fee per deposit.

I've lost count of how many times this thread has jumped topic, it is interesting reading though, even the redundancy, heheh.

Crow is a rogue
Crow explores
Crow hunts solo
Crow hunts with others occasionally (party)
Crow dies
Crow spends gold
Crow has some nice things
Crow talks to people (RP)

I do not understand the problem with adventurers hanging around a city that centers on Waukeen, seems they go hand in hand.

Crow doesn't always have a lot of gold on him because he dies or spends it on nice things. I'm ok with this, it is the way of things. When I die, I respawn, unless someone is near enough to res me IC. No problem.

The system is fine, players need to stop using OOC knowledge and abuses of the system. We all are guilty at times, we are human.
Rules need to be defined.
This is a D&D game using 3.0 rules in a 3.5 world that is is trying (unsuccessfully I hope) to be 4.0
Those that do not understand D&D are seriously lacking and should strive to better understand and learn more.
In D&D, when you die and are raised, in most cases one has level loss, not gold or some XP loss.
Be glad this server is benevolent.
Many of you do not know the pain of rolling stats and making a new character while the group continues on the adventure.
Most of you have not been through Rappan Athuk either, all of you crying rivers about losing gold should experience the hell that is Rappan Athuk, all the gold and gems you can carry but can't use before you will most likely die painfully. *malicious laughter*

Now, now, I'm not pointing fingers, so don't get all red.
Constructive criticism should be a positive thing.

In the world(s) I'm in, the DM has final say, no matter the written rules of the core books. As noted in the Dungeon Master's Guide, "these are merely a guideline".
You players are playing in someone else's world, respect their rules or leave, it is simple.

Selmak wrote:

Jyro X wrote:

That said, this conversation will die out in a matter of a few days only to be brought back up in another 2-3 months, with the same fervor and ridiculous rantings.

Well perhaps instead of letting it die out you should make sure there is some kind of definite closure, so you could tell someone two to three months down the line 'no, we've committed ourselves to this solution which we think is fair' instead of wading in again with the same arguments.

If these kinds of topics don't have some kind of reasonable conclusion, people are going to stop caring about reading them, or even the whole forums. You want to be verbose? Then back it up with action, otherwise quit wasting our time.

The penalties are 100xp/level and 10% gold to a maximum of 40,000. We've committed ourselves to this solution which we think is fair.

Proof: It's in the server as-is, regardless of the multiple arguments placed against it. So quit bringing it up.

There are many who argue that such consequences are insufficient.

I believe the issue people have is what to do once a person reaches level 30. At that point the XP is rather pointless as you can't lose a level to a respawn. It becomes only a point of gold and 40,000 to a level 30 is not even a drop in the hat as a piece of loot can sell for 120,000 easy.

Is 10% of gold, to a max of 40k completely fair? Depends. I can see both sides of the coin (pun intended) in this discussion. Why if you have 400,000 gold do you lose 10%, but if you have 30 million, you only lose 0.13%? Seems a bit odd. Perhaps it should be changed to something a bit more realistic. However, with no way to store gold on Amia, a character is forced to carry all their wealth with them at all times. Making it somewhat unfair for a character to lose several million gold for dying when their character wouldn't be carrying all that gold on them at one time to begin with, but are forced to due to the limitations of the game at this point. Perhaps if some form of banking system was put in place a 10% across the board gold loss for death would be more acceptable. Then, if you lose 3 million gold for dying, it's only because you were stupid enough to carry 30 million gold on you.

ainjyll wrote:

Perhaps if some form of banking system was put in place a 10% across the board gold loss for death would be more acceptable. Then, if you lose 3 million gold for dying, it's only because you were stupid enough to carry 30 million gold on you.

It would need to have fees, though, otherwise no one would lose any gold at all.

Yurell wrote:

It would need to have fees, though, otherwise no one would lose any gold at all.

Of course. Then it becomes a lovely little gold sink as well. The exact specifications of such a project I'll leave to those who would design such a thing.

StandingBehindYou wrote:

IronAngel wrote:

I'm sure Dramaic referred to non-hunting PCs who run a banking business, though. Too bad there's no real investments you could make to be able to pay interest, too.

I can think of one. You could loan money (although no more than 20k) to a lowbie character to allow them to buy gear, and expect them to pay back a greater sum when they reached a higher level.

"Hey, Jackie, where's my money?" *tapping club in his palm menacingly*

....lol, love it :lol:

Yurell wrote:

ainjyll wrote:

Perhaps if some form of banking system was put in place a 10% across the board gold loss for death would be more acceptable. Then, if you lose 3 million gold for dying, it's only because you were stupid enough to carry 30 million gold on you.

It would need to have fees, though, otherwise no one would lose any gold at all.

That is generally the purpose of a bank. To save your money.

TormakSaber wrote:

Yurell wrote:

ainjyll wrote:

Perhaps if some form of banking system was put in place a 10% across the board gold loss for death would be more acceptable. Then, if you lose 3 million gold for dying, it's only because you were stupid enough to carry 30 million gold on you.

It would need to have fees, though, otherwise no one would lose any gold at all.

That is generally the purpose of a bank. To save your money.

I thought the idea was to drain money from the economy, not encourage its growth. The price you pay for security and all.

Storage of gold costs 2.5% of the total gold being withdrawn. It's a service tax due to the monumental effort required to lug in the large quantities of gold some adventurers have.

2.5% of Total gold is a lot less then 10%. Perhaps it may even curb the trend of item hoarding, since the value is now in the coin again due to easy storage and prevention of loss, and not the items.

The idea of banking gold has been suggested in the past and denied due to the fact that it allows players to adventure without consequence.

I say do it with multiple banks in real life.

Each bank will only store (insure) a maximum of say... 1 million gold for you.

In order to store more, you must go to another bank.

I've suggested it in the past but like I said, it gets shot down due to the fact it saves players money and they have nothing left to fear from dying.

Correction to this thread.

Level 30's have nothing left to fear from dying. Everyone else below ends up with the extra penalities due to level 30's "I can't lose a level & don't need XP" status and the fear of a major chunk of their XP is gone.

Any penalities to gold should be limited to level 30. ECL included for the other races. Uncap the gold at level 30 only if your gonna do it.

ainjyll wrote:

I believe the issue people have is what to do once a person reaches level 30.

Put time and effort into preparing stuff with your faction or friends, or even by yourself, make it fun for a lot of people and involve the DM team if needed. Just an idea!

And that's not aimed at anyone, it's just happy-time thought of all the awesome things that could happen, if people focused on that, rather than getting rich.

Yurell wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

Yurell wrote:

ainjyll wrote:

Perhaps if some form of banking system was put in place a 10% across the board gold loss for death would be more acceptable. Then, if you lose 3 million gold for dying, it's only because you were stupid enough to carry 30 million gold on you.

It would need to have fees, though, otherwise no one would lose any gold at all.

That is generally the purpose of a bank. To save your money.

I thought the idea was to drain money from the economy, not encourage its growth. The price you pay for security and all.

Drain money from the economy? Point being?
I mean after you all introduced new loots with beefy prices.

How about we slash two zeroes, reduce the value of a gp to a cp.
When your currency gets too big, adjust it. They did it for the Rouble :lol:

Dramatic_Prince wrote:

Yurell wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

Yurell wrote:

ainjyll wrote:

Perhaps if some form of banking system was put in place a 10% across the board gold loss for death would be more acceptable. Then, if you lose 3 million gold for dying, it's only because you were stupid enough to carry 30 million gold on you.

It would need to have fees, though, otherwise no one would lose any gold at all.

That is generally the purpose of a bank. To save your money.

I thought the idea was to drain money from the economy, not encourage its growth. The price you pay for security and all.

Drain money from the economy? Point being?
I mean after you all introduced new loots with beefy prices.

How about we slash two zeroes, reduce the value of a gp to a cp.
When your currency gets too big, adjust it. They did it for the Rouble :lol:

Because unless you fix the problem, the inflation will just come back again.

Said it before: gold cap. It doesn't make much sense to have more than 1-2 million gold in cash.

Server swapping, a reminder

Who is online