Watch out Raul, the F4G mods might lock the this thread as well, apparently unable to delete stupid posts to keep the good discussion going.



~ Please keep it on topic John. There is no reason for this hostility. I gave warnings & reasons before I locked the other thread. If you cannot keep your personal disputes also out of this thread, then I will be forced to start deleting posts as well, as you have suggested. In which case I will be starting with this post.
cheers, Aly

You dont have to worry John, i asked her to intercede there.

*slaps John* back on topic anyways big man.

Plus we the two threads were very similar and we only needed one.

"ive looted stuff in the past and its sparked scenerio's and offered tons of roleplay, Hanse Davion and his bronze hammer"

Thats because for all your sins Raul you were/are one of the best role players on Europa shard who a lot of players could trust and knew who would do "the right thing" because you come from the same school as the old players.

Just finally [from me anyways] I cant see how this enhances role play enough to warrant its introduction and the subsequent risk.

If two guilds agree to it then why not. Let us know the results. I would genuinely be interested in seeing the results of a proper field test.

As to shaking things up in general - I would prefer some other concepts/ideas before this one like:

Moving everyone to Siege
Movign everyone to two adjacent player run towns in felucca
Changing the rules on spells/weapons

Lots and lots of things coudl shake UO up but dry looting just doesnt seem a sensible or worthwhile option = but try it out and prove me wrong!

But you don't need a looting rule for this. Party the guy you've knocked, ask him if it's ok that you take what ever item it might be from him, then making a scenario out of it. I had this happen to me, and I've done something similar myself.

What does not create any scenarios or fun is when you're knocked out. You walk to a healer, get ressed, return to body and the attacking army has left and you find your corpse with less items in it then when you started the battle.

In my opinion instead of there being consequences to each individual player after a battle there should be consequences to the guilds as a whole instead. But this has been discussed before, and the Minoc campaign was a flop in my eyes. Three guilds claim they won the city, yet no one ever RPs there lol.

Gor thinks lootin' iz fun! Gor take all shiniez an' teef, dem uvvas keep tha rest.

Another point, some guilds that are meant to be "good" wont be allowed to loot due to their guild rules where as some guilds would be able to run about and loot everyone. It wouldnt make it fun, it would just create more problems.

Nice idea, but it will never happen.

Of course i agree but then if i knew beforehand that a concequence of me fighting and being bested in battle may indeed result in the loss of equipment i would :

1. Think hard on wether the fight is worth it and not just fight for the hell of it.
2. Decide wether im strong enough or have strong enough allies to win this battle.
3. Bank anything i do not wish to loose.

It would give more purpose to guild battles, i mean the cost of dying now is virtually zero for a guild. Imagine if said guild lost its guild colours? Imagine if said guilds armour and weapons could be captured as trophies or indeed ransomed back to them?

You ask how this enriches RP, well having a potentially huge cost for being defeated in battle would force warring parties to perhaps talk more? form stronger alliances and generally RP alot more before drawing swords.

Your thinking too black and white Henry. Looting would be open to everyone who decided to do it. The Virtues Knight or Knightly guild could easily sanction looting someone too prevent them harming anyone (or themselves) in the future or indeed to tithe to a worthy cause like his favourite temple or cause (remember armour etc can be sold or ransomed).

Perhaps a knock on effect of people loosing GM stuff, would be a use for GM craftsmen again also?

I do agree that battles should have consequences for guilds, but looting of players would not give this. Plus what of the smaller guilds, like the guards of Trinsic (it's never been known to be the most active group of people) so when some enemies comes to Trinsic the guards have to flee the city then, cause they can't be arsed to fight a much bigger number of people, seeing as they'd be looted afterwards.

Looting random items of players does NOT hurt a guild ic. Losing land, or a town/guild items (like the stones you can steal from diffrent towns in factions) would be great. It would make sense for us to actually do attacks too, not having some lame excuse for looking for a person etc.

I'm all for consequences after battles as long as it "hurts" the guild/army/town. But being able to loot random items from people that annoy you ig will just breed grief.

I like I said previously, if armours and weapons could be looted, a community economy could be created and the crafters of the community would be able to pull together and form some kind of organisation (not saying that they should leave each their own guilds but form an IC organisation) and create an economy.

Which in turn means that the armours need and HAVE to be created by RP chars, and not by blue characters. Works fine in BoC and I'm sure it could work if there was some kind of community crafter organisation.