Factions for thieves and detectives... two sided, cops and robbers. This voluntary program incorporates ideas like the one above... one could really take this pretty far considering it's again, voluntary.
Now this is something I can get behind provided the detective has to actually "do something" to cause this. Just being there isn't enough. Maybe if the characters had an array of names stored for "people that snooped me last" that was kept for say, 2 minutes, then using forensics on the "area" might check all characters vs each character's "people that snooped me last" list and flag guilty parties. I am all for detective vs thief mechanics. They need to be well considered though.
I think that's all a bit too confusing. There's not really any need for a timer either. Taking your idea, I would propose something like this: Using forensics on a location will have the same radius from target as other things in UO, like reveal spell. (Variable radius is just pointless since people are (probably) going to be GM, or not at all. Using forensics on self has that same radius, but from yourself. The skill compares the forensics skill of user to ALL in-range player-mobile's snooping skill. GM vs GM = 50% chance (basically the same as the calculation for detect hidden comparing detect vs hiding) If the skill fails, you find nothing (but other normal forensics actions still happen). If the skill succeeds AND the snooper is in the thieves guild (on a mobile by mobile basis here) AND both the snooper and "snooped" are in range, AND the snooping happened in the past 2 minutes, then the snooper turns grey to only the detective for the typical 2 minute timer. If forensics is used to find out who "looted" a body, AND that looting was a criminal activity, the looter will be perma to ONLY the detective, for an indefinite time period. (basically just add the looter as perma to the detective, this mechanic already exists in the code). It resets on death of the looter. These are not perfect details, and there would be a lot more considerations required, but my thoughts are this: This allows detectives to flag snoopers grey if it's obvious they are snooping. It cannot be abused by simply macroing forensics in town to make many people grey since the timer runs out after 2 minutes, and since the snooper and "snooped" must be in range. It does suffice to be usable in ordinary situations when you see a thief prowling about. This could combat bank thieves nicely, which I am sure the shard would appreciate, given players actually "play" a detective. (I am sure some would) There are many reasons someone might get a murder count, and I don't think it's reasonable to punish someone who has recently killed but is not a murderer other than with the already-established criminal flag. UO has a noteriety system already, it works great. This would however punish "blue pks" by making them perma after looting a corpse they kill, and also punish looters who loot a corpse that they just found dead. This is still consistent, because you know looting a blue corpse is bad, so nothing confusing happens really. It's easy to understand. It might also teach non-theives about the "perma" flag and how it works (which is a source of confusion for many). The reason I like this type of addition is that it's not an obvious nerf for thieves, and it's not an obvious benefit for non-thieves. If you do something like "make snooping flag grey", it is a negative aspect for thieves (and non thieves actually, who are macroing skills/stats). Instead, this type of "expanding the functionality of a lesser used skill" works nicely. It can promote new character templates, it can cause a player-player dynamic to happen creating new aspects of the game. It has no effect on most people who aren't looting or snooping or trying to kill loooters/snoopers. It doesn't just nerf thieves and give everyone else their choice of player templates to use to kill them, it requires thief-killers to sacrafice 100 skill points for the ability to do so more easily. That's nothing compared to the skill points a thief gives up, but it is more than enough to prevent every player from being able to do it without some sacrafice. Requiring the snooper to be in the thieves guild prevents "snooping" from being a dangerous activity to new players gaining stats etc, and instead makes sure the punishment is basically to people who are actually thieves. (but this isn't a requirement for the looting part) I really do like it. I think it's a nice method to combat thieves as it puts keeping them in check in the player's hands instead of trammeling it all up. Hopefully @Chris is reading this thread and will consider something like this without injecting trammel into it.
I've always hated Shadowjerk and I haven't played here in years but I read the forums from time to time and I'm gonna chime in for a good cause. The "Relevant Publish" page on this very site - http://uorforum.com/threads/ultima-online-relevant-publish-archive.52/ - links to crucial information on stealing: http://www.uoguide.com/Publish_-_February_24,_1999 To wit: There will be four possible outcomes to stealing: True success: you get the item and are not noticed. Partial success: you get the item, but are noticed. Partial failure: you do not get the item, but are not noticed. Total failure: you do not get the item, and your attempt is noticed. Now we can read that and act like we don't know that "True success: you get the item and are not noticed." means you stay blue, like Kaivan pretending he couldn't see any printed word that disputed house-killing. But we ought not to do that. However, if some Disciples of Kaivan are lurking and waiting to champion the extremely unlikely and obtuse side of the argument, we can turn to Google with the keywords "Ultima", "stealing", and "true success" and find a page that doesn't currently exist but with the help of the Wayback Machine we can resurrect it: http://web.archive.org/web/20000612145053/http://guide.uo.com/skill_33.html Date is in the URL^ - June 12th, 2000 To wit: There are four possible outcomes to stealing: True Success: you get the item and are not noticed Partial Success: you get the item, but are noticed Partial Failure: you do not get the item, but are not noticed Total failure: you do not get the item, and your attempt is noticed If your attempt is noticed, the guards can be called on you, so you must be very careful when attempting these practices. It is also important to note that for two minutes after stealing, the member of the Thieves' Guild is freely attackable by anyone in the area. But wait - maybe "If your attempt is noticed, the guards can be called on you" isn't plain enough either. So here's a final, By God, definitive explanation of the damn system, again courtesy of the Wayback Machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20000613185651/http://uo.stratics.com/ (Under [Flags (blue, grey, and red)] in the sidebar): From June 13, 2000, section titled "Stealing Flag": What are the symptoms? You appear grey to everyone. and: Stealing flags are given to thieves who either totally fail, partially fail, or partially succeed in their attempt to steal from either an NPC, player or container. ^^and if that doesn't tell you that a True Success means you stay blue, then I give up & you win, Kaivan.
That's the same info i come up with when i search around and it is also as I remember it was back on OSI. If anyone wonder why thieves complains about failing steals, the answer is in this last post. There was much more chances to hit a semi-success or success.
People on another forum on "that shard": New player who won't last 2 weeks before giving up: "Hey Kaivan the mechanics are truly broken when you can kill someone in their house with a bug that OSI deemed necessary to fix, it's hurting our daily population of 30 real IP's..." Kaivan: "Broken???? BROKEN?!?!?! It's the way it was intended! What kind of era accurate t2a shard would we be if we "fixed" all these so-called "bugs" aka features that made this era great!? This is a museum! A museum of grief, noob tears, and shattered dreams, just like in the good old days! Why, I think you're lying when you say OSI fixed those "bugs" aka features, I have no such knowledge of osi ever NOT allowing house killing in t2a era. You know what? That's not very era-accurate of you to say so! *swat on the head with a rolled up newspaper* *lock thread* + *forum and IP ban* Now let this noob be an example to the rest of you, you NEVER question my ultimate knowledge and authority of the t2a era, or else!!"
Since this came up in IRC when I was logged in and saw it, I'll mention this. @ShadowJack is right. The patch notes from February 24, 1999 clearly state the 4 steal states @ShadowJack mentioned. Here's a link in which is clearly explained. Sorry @Chris, and not to be cruel, but that just sounds like being lazy. For as much hard work and effort as you put into this shard, for which we are all massively thankful, it really sounds like either you or the staff didn't want to find it. I spent 10 minutes searching Google for patch notes since they only go back so far on UO's official website. Because every game change on Production OSI shards was detailed. They love to tell you what changes have been made to skills and which ones were added. If you take issue with the source website, I'm fairly certain Mythic will be able to produce the information for you, if you care enough to ask. And as far as it being able to be done 2/3rds of the time and players being griefed, again, not to be cruel, but that's an admin side failure. There's no reason to make it so 66% of the time a player had the option of being that successful... 10% tops based on the size of the object and maybe a 5% bonus per nestled container it's in. I understand the ideology of being against not noticing a theft and being unable to attack the person because you can't prove it. With folks AFKing 2/3rds of their characters, if you didn't notice somebody stole your item, that's on you honestly. For all the disgust for trammel, the resistance to this era accurate Felucca mechanic is baffling. I would propose a minor change to that which would give you recourse but only if you were actually paying attention to your character like you should be. It would be: Upon true success, you don't flag grey to anyone but the victim can still attack you. It gives the victim recourse but requires them to actually be paying attention. If you saw a character pop up and notice something out of your pack is missing, then bet your life on it and go attack the suspect. If you're wrong, enjoy the nice halberd decapitation via guards. It is ridiculous to even suggest that a Grandmaster thief couldn't steal something as small as a rune out of a nestled backpack the victim didn't even have open on their screen to notice. For as much as you guys rage against Trammel, afk macroing, and standing around in the guard zone, it's shocking to see the intentional failure of logic and outcry of something which is not only logical, era accurate, and supports the Felucca ruleset. The constant complaints about folks standing around in town and yet this is the argument you want to make? LOL! Edit: The irony? You can still do a true success here. I tried it. My thief didn't flag grey to the victim and I could still recall and gate away. No 'ERMAGARD, SOMEBODY STOLE FROM ME!' message either.
majinko is correct. i recall this mechanic distinctly on OSI. I have no idea what the actual percentages were on "perfect steals" but they were a thing for sure. i dont recall if you could actually attack the thief during the crim timer after a steal, but the victim (usually me) got no message about it and the perpetrator stayed visually blue.
It's still abusive though. Not everyone is gonna fight back. So, 66% of the time thieves will still walk around taunting their victims. I think Chris wants the profession to be hard and not something that would discourage new players from settling here. And it should be. If you're a smart thief, cast gate, you can still get away from a crime scene unscathed. Drop items at your house and keep them under lock and key.
But new players have the benefit of the young status and aren't able to be stolen from. So personally I can't get behind the "it would discourage new players from settling here" argument. By the time your characters out of the young program you would of spent what? 300+ hours in game, and sure maybe half of that is afk, maybe even 2/3's but that's still 100 hours of sitting at a bank learning the lay of the land. Personally I'm for the changes, I remember this being the deal back in the day and it was rad. And if I get something valuable stolen out of my pack of course I'll be pissed off - with myself - because there's ways to protect valuables and insure the likelihood of that is minimal, if it was worth keeping I should of been smarter.
I respect your opinion and I'm sure it is fun for thieves to remain blue and keep on pilfering away. However I support more challenge, using more skill sets such as hiding and stealth, and being more pragmatic in general when it comes to thievery. It just seems if the 'stay blue true success' was enable there will be more of a supermarket sweep attitude and less of a pvp aspect to the skill.
I think that was a negative change for thieves. Most people don't track, and even if they do it's not a big deal unless there's a group of players. The inability to track made it more difficult for thieves to find people.
And on the flip side it makes it harder for people to track down the theif who just stole from them. Works both ways I guess. Each cancel the opposite out.
Well I don't know about non cA thieves, but tracking was heavily used by us, and almost nobody except for PK's used it. So it was most definitely a negative in that regard. But I get your point. At least tracking is something everyone can agree is terrible now.
Anyone with half a sense of the game, which is most at champ spawns, realized they could put track on a repeating macro that would eventually track a thief, even with virtually no track skill. By eventually I mean within a few minutes. Or.. they would just get their tracker char and shut the thief down. I personally experienced this at every champ I went to, which was only a few. I gave up on my thief when I first got here due to how easy it was to track. I should wipe the dust off him and go back out now that tracking is nerf'd. My argument then was a dedicated rogue skillset was made completely useless by a tamer with a side job of tracking pets for zookeeper quest.
Tracking still works great for tamers looking for zookeeper tames. Also works great to track pets of tamers farming.. hint hint to the reds.
