New rule

[Ernil]

Johnny - but it also means that the risk the hunter involves himself with is much higher than that of the robber.

If we say the robber succeds in killing the hunter then he or she may take the clothes. However if the hunter succeds in killing the robber - what ? he takes his potions ?

This rule was not properly discussed before releasing it. It should have been you can loot weaponry or armor instead of clothes. With looting weaponry and armors it would also boost the economy for merchant classes.

As I said. The hunter knows the risk by putting cloths on. A red char can also wear cloths.

Edit: I didn't hear all this when it was dryloot. Everyones cloths can be taken. Red or not. If you don't wanna loose cloths don't wear them when solo hunting.

That is exactly why im all up for drylooting - This magical cloth rule is basicly created for the robbers. If there is risk for one party - there should be risk for the other.

There is absolutely no other point as to why only magical clothes would be looted. I mean if you want to boost the economy so selling stuff might actualy work again on the forums then implement drylooting. If you want to do it step by step to see how the shard would improve - then you picked the wrong "item" to start the test with. Obviously you should start with the basic items such as armors and weapons.

So far i havent seen a single decent statement as to why the lootable items should be magic clothing.

And dalton learn to ignore quintoz - he normaly posts stuff like that.

[Johnny Walac]

But there is a risk for red chars. Our cloths can be looted. Why is that hard to understand? You think "hunters" are the only one wearing magic cloths? Ever tried applying deadly with 85poisoning? Yeah kinda sucks. The fail rate is high and if I wanna use deadly in PvP I gotta wear my cloth. And I am ready to accept that risk and it might be the difference between life and death. Just as the "hunter" gotta accept if he wanna take down that giant faster. He will wear cloths.


Same for religion PvP. Those who want the upperhand will use cloths. But the risk is there that they will loose them.

[Arthur White]

Johnny, this will only make ppl in general not to wear cloths, thus making the economy even crappier...

[Kent Strider]

Johnny, this will only make ppl in general not to wear cloths, thus making the economy even crappier...

Bingo! The people are right, make it weapons or armor.

[Johnny Walac]

Johnny, this will only make ppl in general not to wear cloths, thus making the economy even crappier...

Thus making hunting harder. And the income of gold and cloths will decrease.

Oh i'm all up for dryloot. But right now we don't have it. And i'll accept what we get.

[Ernil]

But there is a risk for red chars. Our cloths can be looted. Why is that hard to understand? You think "hunters" are the only one wearing magic cloths? Ever tried applying deadly with 85poisoning? Yeah kinda sucks. The fail rate is high and if I wanna use deadly in PvP I gotta wear my cloth. And I am ready to accept that risk and it might be the difference between life and death. Just as the "hunter" gotta accept if he wanna take down that giant faster. He will wear cloths.


Same for religion PvP. Those who want the upperhand will use cloths. But the risk is there that they will loose them.

Not to nitpick but you just compared indy poisoning with a full indy set of clothes. By that itself you proved my point.

If you want to only focus around PVP - then the rule should also only be focused around PVP.

[Johnny Walac]

But there is a risk for red chars. Our cloths can be looted. Why is that hard to understand? You think "hunters" are the only one wearing magic cloths? Ever tried applying deadly with 85poisoning? Yeah kinda sucks. The fail rate is high and if I wanna use deadly in PvP I gotta wear my cloth. And I am ready to accept that risk and it might be the difference between life and death. Just as the "hunter" gotta accept if he wanna take down that giant faster. He will wear cloths.


Same for religion PvP. Those who want the upperhand will use cloths. But the risk is there that they will loose them.

Not to nitpick but you just compared indy poisoning with a full indy set of clothes. By that itself you proved my point.

If you want to only focus around PVP - then the rule should also only be focused around PVP.

The Indy Poisoning was an example. If you are unsure what I mean with my post you can send me a PM and i'll explain nice and slow.
And only focused around PvP? You was the one who said robbers (Robbery is often an act of PvP) will only benefit from this. And yes this is mostly focused around PvP because in wich other case will you loose cloths? From monsters? Well make a rule that monsters can't yoink you. I'm sure they will listen.

But i'm a reasonable guy and i'll make an example you will understand.

If I as a robber wanna be sure that my victim dies (Be it NPC or PC). I will wear my Indy Fencing. Indy Healing. Indy Anatomy. Indy Poisoning. Indy Tactics.
The risk for me loosing these clothes are probably bigger then yours when i'm out running around. But let's say they are equal. I accept this risk as it will increase my chance to win over a NPC or PC in a hunt or PvP.

If you as a hunter wanna be sure that your victim dies (Be it NPC or PC). You will wear your Indy cloths. As it will increase your chance to win over a NPC or PC in a hunt or PvP.

The difference between a "Robber" and a "Hunter" is that my name is red while yours is blue. Other then that we are both players under same the rules on the same shard. I am after gold and cloths while you are after gold and cloths. We are both geared to gain gold and cloths.

[Glarundis]

Ernil is right.
You just have to take indy poisoning to get yourself 95 poisoning and deadlies.
Atleast this is good just so that you guys won't have deadly poisoning all the time, unless you carry clothes.
But you can't really compare indy poisoning to a full cloth set that someone takes to hunt.
So, once again, ernil is right.
If you rob someone and he has clothes, you can get lucky and loot a full set. If he kills you, he gets what?indy poisoning?It's not like you're going to have indy anatomy and indy tactics to rob ppl.

Then, it is also true that those who have clothes are only the richer ones, who keeping getting more clothes, and buying clothes, selling etc. With this said, I suppose only the rich would lose? Or those who are not so rich and want to move on to the "hey i'm rich, i hunt with clothes" part

As long as I hunt without clothes I'm not to worry about this. But it should go like, you can decide to loot clothes only, or to loot weapons/armors only. Just so that you can cause harm to your opponent, but not totally anihilate him. Getting looted of everything you worked for sucks.

And after all this, we still have the economy part. This won't help a bit. What we need is merchant made items to be lootable. Not items that you find now and then, like someone said. Sure thing that, if you only loot weapons/armors and leave the clothes, it's stupid as can be. You rob someone to take something but you leave the most valuable things there are? Doesn't make sense, no robber would think like that.

I can't really say which option is better.
My solution would be, either we postpone this to come up with a stable decision, or we accept full drylooting, let hell break loose and think about it in one month when everyone starts whining. But to be honest, drylooting was here before. People were robbed. We know how the game is, there are risks. Like I said before in some other topic, the only problem is about new chars. Everyone else, the world is out there, and it's a bitchy one.

edit: (just read johnny's post)
johnny, I don't think that it's really like that. Everyone knows that ppl go in hunting gear that costs millions while guys come with onyx poisoned spear and dspines. Yes, we've seen this type of scenario before.

the prey has millions that he can lose, the robber has dspine set an onyx spear.
unless, hey, the robbers nowadays (I haven't been robbed since when I left years ago) are gourmet style, in top pvp gear. I'm yet to see that.

[Johnny Walac]

"You just have to take indy poisoning to get yourself 95 poisoning and deadlies."

And you just have to take indy healing to get 110 healing.

The Indy Poisoning was an example. Read the above post against please and send me a PM if you don't get the point Glarundis.

Thanks,

[Glarundis]

Not everyone has 100 healing. And an indy healing is still more expensive than an indy poisoning. Btw, I sent you a PM